IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


{./ 


V^ 


<^w^ 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


■u  liU    |2.2 
Z   I4£    12.0 


|l.8 
U    I L6 


IJ4 


^/. 


0/ 


? 


^^ 


,\ 


A 


:\ 


V 


\ 


V 


•«l)^ 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions 


Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


1980 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checlced  below. 


0 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 


I — I   Covers  damaged/ 


0 


D 


D 


D 


Couverture  endommag6e 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur6e  et/ou  peliiculAe 


I — I    Cover  title  missing/ 


Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


□    Coloured  maps/ 
Cartes  giographiques  en  couleur 

□    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

I — I    Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 


Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
Reli6  avec  d'autres  documents 


r~7|    Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 


along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serr6e  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 

distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  int6rieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajout6es 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  dtait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  film^es. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl6mentaires: 


L'Institut  a  microf  iimt  le  meiiieur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  At6  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exempleire  qui  sont  peut-Atre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  methods  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqute  ci-dessous. 


r~n   Coloured  pages/ 


D 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommag^es 

Pages  restored  and/oi 

Pages  restauries  et/ou  pelliculdes 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxe( 
Pages  d6coior6es,  tachetdes  ou  piqudes 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ddtachdes 

Showthrough/ 
Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Quality  inigale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materic 
Comprend  du  materiel  suppldmentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Mition  disponible 


I      I  Pages  damaged/ 

I      I  Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 

r~^  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 

I      I  Pages  detached/ 

I      I  Showthrough/ 

I      I  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

r~y|  Includes  supplementary  material/ 

I — I  Only  edition  available/ 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  fiimies  d  nouveau  de  fapon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


□   This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 
Ce  document  est  film6  au  taux  de  rMuction  indiqu6  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


30X 


12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

National  Library  of  Canada 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grdce  A  la 
g^nirositi  de: 

Bibliothdque  nationale  du  Canada 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — »>  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  y  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettet6  de  l'exemplaire  filmd,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprim^e  sont  film^s  en  commen9ant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'iilustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  seion  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  fiimis  en  commenpant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'iilustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaftra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE  ",  le 
symbole  y  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
film6s  A  des  taux  de  reduction  diffirents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  cliche,  it  est  filmd  d  partir 
de  I'angle  sup6rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  ndcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  m6thode. 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

^ 


•|,M 


■Jul 

."if 


•v\    ' 


i 


J* 

\ 

,.v 


"i 


A 


» 


^ 


'/•U: 

» 

.'V 

)• 

'i-^i 

$ 

\?i^ 

'% 

^^V ,. 

?^ 

-■.• 

V 

f 

■yi 

'} 

■^^ 

, 

- 

•H-. 

>*i 


■\. 


?» 


^MI^ri^M^ 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  with 
Canada  of  1854. 


Vo 


R 


.  n 


I>XJBIl.I0A.XI01SrS 


OF  TUB 


American  Economic  Association. 


Vol.  VII.     No.  6.  | 


Six  nvmiieu  4  tii«« 

P>IOa  t4.M  *   TBAB. 


THE 


Reciprocity  Treaty  witli  Canada 

of  1854. 


BY 


FREDERICK   E.   HAYNES.  Ph.D. 


American  Economic  Association, 

November,  1803. 


COPYHIOIIT.   1802,  BY  AMBBICAN  ECONOMIC  ASSOCIATION. 


BALTIMORE : 
FROM  THE  Press  of  Guggknheimkb,  Weil  &  Co. 

}81S. 


TABLE   OF  CONTENTS. 


I'Adh. 

Articles  ok  tuk  Rixiimiocity  Tukaty 7 

H ISTORY    OK   TH  K   TrKATY i) 

Thk  Working  ok  tub  Treaty 30 

Appendix:    Trauk  Statistics 59 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  with  Canada  of  1854. 


The  treaty  concluded  between  the  United  States 
and  Great  Britain  on  June  5,  1854,  was  designed  to 
regulate  the  commercial  relations  between  the  United 
States  and  the  British  possessions  in  North  America. 
It  was  negotiated  at  Washington  by  William  L. 
Marcy,  Secretary  of  State  of  the  United  States,  and 
by  the  Earl  of  Elgin  and  Kincardine,  Governor- Gen- 
eral of  the  North  American  provinces,  acting  for  their 
respective  governments. 

The  treaty  consisted  of  seven  articles,  of  which 
the  first  two  related  to  the  fisheries,  the  third  to 
reciprocal  trade,  the  fourth  to  the  navigation  of  the 
St.  Lawrence,  the  fiftL  to  the  duration  and  abroga- 
tion of  the  treaty,  the  sixth  to  the  extension  of  the 
provisions  of  the  treaty  to  Newfoundland,  if  that 
colony  indicated  a  desire  for  such  extension,  and 
the  last  article  to  the  ratification  of  the  treaty. 

The  third  and  fourth  articles,  to  the  discussion  of 

which  I  intend  to  devote  this  paper,  are  as  follows: 

Art.  III.  It  is  agreed  that  the  articles  enumerated  in  the  sched- 
ule hereunto  annexed,  being  the  growth  and  produce  of  the  afore- 
said British  colonies,  or  of  the  United  States,  shall  be  admitted  into 
each  country  respectively  free  of  duty. 

Schedule. 

Grain,  flour  and  breadstuifs  of  all  kinds. 
Animals  of  all  kinds. 
Fresh,  smoked  and  salted  meats. 
Cotton-wool,  seeds  and  vegetables. 


8 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


[424 


Undried  fruits,  dried  fruits. 

Fish  of  all  kinds. 

Products  of  fish  and  all  other  creatures  living  in  the  water. 

Poultry,  eggs. 

Hides,  furs,  skins,  or  tails,  undressed. 

Stono  or  marble,  in  its  crude  or  unwrought  state. 
,    Slate. 

Butter,  cheese  and  tallow. 

Lard,  horns,  manures. 

Ores  of  metals  of  all  kinds. 

Coal, 
t    Pitch,  tar,  turpentine,  ashes. 

Timber  and  lumber  of  all  kinds,  round,  hewed  and  sawed,  un- 
manufactured in  whole  or  in  part. 

Firewood. 

Plants,  shrubs  and  trees. 

Pelts,  wool. 

Fish-oil. 

Bice,  broom-corn  aad  bark. 

Gypsum,  ground  or  unground.  ' 

Hewn  or  wrought  or  unwrought  burrs  or  grindstones.        ' 

Dyestuffs. 

Flax,  hemp  and  tow,  unmanufactured;  unmanufactured  tobacco. 

Rags. 

Art.  IV.  It  is  agreed  that  the  citizens  and  inhabitants  of  the 
United  States  shall  have  the  right  to  navigate  the  river  St.  Law- 
rence and  the  canals  of  Canada,  used  as  the  means  of  communica- 
tion between  the  great  lakes  and  the  Atlantic  ocean,  with  their 
vessels,  boats  and  crafts,  as  fully  and  freely  as  the  subjects  of  Her 
Brittanic  Majest} ,  subject  only  to  the  same  tolls  and  other  assess- 
ments as  now  are,  or  may  hereafter  be,  exacted  of  Her  Majesty's 
said  subjects;  it  being  understoc  '1,  however,  that  the  British  govern- 
ment retains  the  right  of  suspending  this  privilege  on  giving  due 
notice  thereof  to  the  government  of  the  United  States. 

It  is  further  agreed  that  if  at  any  time  the  British  government 
should  exercise  the  said  reserved  right,  the  government  of  the 
United  States  shall  have  the  right  of  suspending,  if  it  thinks  fit, 
the  operation  of  Article  III  of  the  present  treaty,  in  so  far  as  the 
province  of  Canada  is  affected  thereby,  for  so  long  as  the  suspen- 
sion of  the  free  navigation  of  the  river  St.  Lawrence  or  the  canals 
may  continue. 

It  is  further  agreed  that  British  subjects  shall  have  the  right 
freely  to  navigate  Lake  Michigan  with  their  vessels,  boats  and 
crafts  so  long  as  the   privilege  of   navigating  the  river  St.  Law- 


425] 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


9 


rence,  secured  to  American  citizens  by  the  above  clause  of  the 
present  article  shall  continue;  and  the  government  of  the  United 
States  further  engages  to  urge  upon  the  state  governments  to  secure 
to  the  subjects  of  Her  Brittanic  Majesty  the  use  of  the  several  state 
canals  on  terms  of  equality  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  United 
States. 

And  it  is  further  agreed  that  no  export  duty,  or  other  duty, 
shall  be  levied  on  lumber  or  timber  of  any  kind  cut  on  that  por- 
tion of  the  American  territory  in  the  state  of  Maine,  watered  by 
the  river  St.  John  and  its  tributaries,  and  floated  down  that  river 
to  the  sea,  when  the  same  is  shipped  to  the  United  States  from  the 
province  of  New  Brunswick.' 


History  of  the  Treaty. 

Previously  to  1845  the  trade  between  the  United 
States  and  British  provinces  was  burdened  with  a 
system  of  differential  duties  which  discriminated 
against  foreign  importations  into  Canada  in  favor 
of  British  to  such  an  extent  as  to  prevent  any 
extensive  trade. 

In  1845  the  British  government  changed  its  com- 
mercial policy  by  authorizing  the  Canadian  legisla- 
ture to  regulate  its  own  tariff.  In  1847  the  Cana- 
dian legislature  removed  the  existing  differential 
duties,  and  admitted  American  goods  on  the  same 
terms  as  those  imported  from  Great  Britain. 

This  change  of  policy  seems  to  have  been  the  result 
of  two  causes;  (1)  of  that  change  of  policy  in  Eng- 
land which  manifested  itself  in  the  abolition  of  the 
Corn  laws  in  1846,  and  in  the  repeal  of  the  Naviga- 
tion laws  in  1849;  and  (2)  of  local  causes  in  Canada. 
'The  Canadian  rebellion  of  1838-39  was  the  result  of 
the  long  continued  hostility  between  the  English  in 
Upper  Canada  and  the  French  in  Lower   Canada. 

'"Treaties  and  Conventions  of  the  United  States."    pp.  448-453. 


10 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


[426 


The  attempt  of  Pitt  in  1791  to  settle  the  dispute  by 
dividing  Canada  into  two  provinces  had  failed.  The 
long  pent-up  feeling  broke  out  in  open  rebellion  in 
both  the  provinces.  To  pacify  the  people  the  British 
go'^'ernment  decided  to  reunite  the  two  provinces  and 
give  to  the  consolidated  province  a  responsible  gov- 
evTi*nent  in  accordance  with  the  recommendation  of 
Lord  Durham's  report  of  1839.  This  was  done  in 
1840. 

The  constitutional  grievances  were,  however,  not 
the  only  ones.  The  people  of  Canada  saw,  with  in- 
creasing discontent,  the  rapid  strides  of  the  United 
States  in  wealth.  They  longed  to  share  in  that 
progress,  and  hence  the  desire  of  annexation  began 
to  be  felt.  Lord  Elgin,  the  governor- general  fiom 
1847-1864,  recognized  the  conditions,  and  through 
his  efforts  the  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854  was  nego- 
tiated, giving  to  the  people  some  of  the  advantages 
possessed  by  their  more  fortunate  and  richer  neigh- 
bors. 

'  In  March,  1849,  Lord  Elgin  called  Lord  Grey's 
attention  to  the  subject: 

"There  has  been,"  he  writes,  "a  vast  deal  of  talk  about  'annexa- 
tion,'as  is  unfortunately  alwavs  the  case  here  when  there  is  any- 
thing to  agitate  the  public  mind.  ...  A  great  deal  of  this  tali: 
is,  however,  bravado,  and  a  great  deal  the  mere  product  of  thought- 
lessness. Undoubtedly  it  is  in  some  quarters  the  utterance  of  very 
serious  conviction;  and  if  England  will  not  make  the  sacrifices 
which  are  absolutely  necessary  to  put  the  colonists  here  in  as  good 
a  position  commercially  as  the  citizens  of  the  States — in  order  to 
which  free  navigation  and  reciprocal  trade  with  the  states  are  indispen- 
sable— if  not  only  the  organs  of  the  league,  but  those  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  of  the  Peel  party,  are  always  writing  as  if  it  were  an 
admitted  fact  that  colonies,  and  more  especially  Canada,  are  a  bur- 
den, to  be  endured  only  because  they  cannot  be  got  rid  of,  the 
end  may  be  nearer  than  we  wot  of."* 

'  "Letters  and  Journals  of  Lord  Elgin."  Edited  by  T.  Walrond. 
London,  1872.     pp.  100,  102  and  104. 


427] 


71ie  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


11 


Again,  in  November  of  the  same  year,  he  writes: 

"But  if  things  remain  on  their  present  footing  in  this  respect, 
there  is  nothing  before  us  but  violent  agitation,  euJing  in  convul- 
sion  or  annexation.  .  .  .  And  I  much  fear  that  no  measure  but 
the  establishment  of  reciprocal  trade  between  Canada  and  the  States, 
or  the  imposition  of  a  duty  on  the  produce  of  the  States  when  im- 
ported into  England,  will  remove  it."' 

Such  being  the  state  of  feeling  in  Canada  in  re- 
gard to  matters  of  trade,  the  address'  of  the  Parlia- 
ment to  the  Queen,  praying  that  the  prospective 
changes  in  the  laws  regulating  the  admission  of  for- 
eign grain  into  the  British  markets  might  be  made 
with  some  reference  to  their  needs,  came  as  a  natural 
consequence.  This  address  also  contained  a  specific 
request  for  the  opening  of  negotiations  with  the 
United  States  for  the  admission  of  the  products  of 
either  country  into  the  ports  of  the  other  upon  equal 
terms.  This  address,  made  on  May  12, 1846,  received 
a  favorable  answer  on  June  3,  1840,  and  thus  became 
the  first  direct  step  in  the  negotiation  of  the  reci- 
procity treaty. 

Accordingly,  in  December,  1846,  the  British  minis- 
ter, Mr.  Pakenham,  acting  under  instructions,  com- 
municated with  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  Robert 
J.  Walker,  upon  the  subject.  The  United  Slates  gov- 
ernment proved  to  be  favorably  disposed  to  the  propo- 
sition for  freer  trade  with  Canada,  and  upon  consul- 
tation it  was  decided  to  proceed  by  means  of  concur- 
rent legislation  by  the  United  States  and  Canada. 
Steps  were  therefore  taken  for  the  completion  of  this 
plan. 

'  "Letters  and  Journals  of  Lord  Elgin."  Edited  by  T.  Walronu. 
London,  1872.    pp.  100, 102  and  104. 

'■"'House  Executive  Documents."  First  Session  Thirty-first  Con- 
gress.    Vol.  VIII,  No.  04,  p.  2.     1849-50. 


12 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


[428 


In  1847  the  Canadian  Parliament,  immediately 
availing  itself  of  the  power  conferred  upon  it  by  the 
Imperial  government,  to  regulate  duties  on  the  pro- 
ducts both  of  foreign  countries  and  of  the  mother 
country,  the  duties  on  American  manufactures  were 
lowered  from  12A  to  7+  per  cent.,  and  those  on  British 
manufactures  were  raised  from  5  to  7^,  ihub  placing 
the  United  States  on  an  equality  with  the  mother 
country.' 

The  memorandum  of  the  Hon.  W.  H.  Merritt,  sub- 
mitted to  the  United  States  in  the  summer  of  1849, 
contains  a  copy  of  an  act  of  the  Canadian  Parlia- 
ment '"to  provide  for  the  free  admission  of  certain 
articles  of  the  growth  or  production  of  the  United 
States  of  America  into  Canada,  whenever  similar 
articles,  the  growth  and  production  of  Canada,  shall 
be  admitted  without  duty  into  the  said  States. "^ 

In  1848  a  bill  was  drawn  up  by  the  committee  on 
commerce  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  and 
strongly  recommended  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Trea- 
sury. This  bill  passed  the  House  without  opposition 
in  1848,  but  failed  to  receive  the  attention  of  the 
Senate  on  account  of  the  pressure  of  other  business. 
At  the  next  session  it  again  failed  to  be  acted  upon 
by  the  Senate  for  the  same  reason.-' 

In  January,  IbSO,  a  similar  bill  was  reported  by  the 
committee  on  commerce,  and  recommitted  "with  a 
view  to  provide  therein  for  the  free  navigation  of 
the  river  St.  Lawrence,  and  to  assimilate  the  same 
to  the  bill  now  pending  before  the  Senate  of  the  like 

*>  "House  Executive  Documents."  First  Session  Thirty-first  Con- 
gress.    Vol.  VIII,  No.  04,  pp.  3-4. 

^Same,  p.  14. 

'"House  Executive  Documents."  First  Session  Thirty-first  Con- 
gress.    Vol.  VIII,  No.  04,  p.  3. 


429] 


The  Reciprocity  Treat ij  of  1854. 


18 


character."  The  committee  on  commerce,  through 
its  chairman,  Robert  M.  McLane,  requested  the  Sec- 
retary of  State  to  inform  it  upon  the  subject  of  the 
navigation  of  the  St.  Lawrence.  Secretary  Clayton, 
after  communication  with  the  British  minister,  in- 
formed the  committee  of  the  readiness  of  the  British 
government  to  concede  the  navigation  by  treaty.' 
The  introduction  of  this  new  feature  seems  to  have 
caused  the  first  consideration  of  a  treaty  in  reference 
to  the  pending  negotiations. 

Finally  at  the  next  session  the  subject  was  taken 
up  again  as  a  matter  of  legislation  by  the  introduc- 
tion in  the  House  of  a  tlU  for  reciprocity  of  trade 
between  the  United  States  and  Canada  and  for  the 
free  navigation  by  American  vessels  of  the  canals 
and  waters  of  Canada.  Late  in  the  session  the  mat- 
ter was  debated,  and  an  amendment  suggested,  which 
provided  for  the  importation  of  American  manufac- 
tures into  Canada  at  the  same  rates  as  those  at  which 
British  manufactures  were  imported.' 

After  1851  no  serious  attempt  was  made  to  obtain 
reciprocal  trade  by  means  of  concurrent  legislation. 
There  were  probably  two  principal  reasons  for  this 
neglect,  (1)  the  disturbed  political  condition  of  the 
times,  and  (2)  the  situation  in  regard  to  the  north- 
eastern fisheries,  arising  from  differences  in  interpre- 
tation of  the  convention  of  1818. 

The  beginning  of  the  negotiations  in  regard  to  re- 
ciprocity had  arisen  from  the  discontent  in  Canada, 
but  the  introduction  of  the  question  of  the  fisheries 


^Congressional  Globe.  First  Session  Thirty-first  Congress.  Part 
II,  page  1009.     1849-50. 

-Congressional  Qlobe.  Second  Session  Thirty-first  Congress.  Vol. 
XXIII,  p.  22,  150-51.    1850-51. 


14 


The  Reciprocity  I'realy  of  1854. 


[430 


interested  the  maritime  provinces  exclusively.  In  this 
way  the  negotiation  became  extended  so  as  to  include 
all  the  British  possessions  in  North  America.  It  is 
probable,  however,  that  without  the  existence  of  the 
fishery  problem,  the  maritime  provinces  would  have 
been  included  in  any  reciprocity  measure,  for  in  184U 
the  British  charge  d'affaires,  writing  to  the  Secretary 
of  State,  says  that  he  has  lately  received  an  instruc- 
tion directing  him,  with  the  concurrence  of  the  lieu- 
tenant governor  of  New  Brunswick,  to  negotiate  for 
the  extension  of  reciprocity  to  that  province  upon  the 
same  conditions  for  which  it  may  be  conceded  to 
Canada.' 

Just  at  the  end  of  the  session  of  Congress  in  1853, 
Mr.  Breckinridge  moved  for  the  suspension  of  the 
rules  for  the  introduction  of  the  resolution  requesting 
the  President  "to  arrange  by  treaty  the  questions 
connected  with  the  fisheries  on  the  coasts  of  British 
North  America,  the  free  navigation  of  the  St.  Law- 
rence and  St.  John,  the  export  duty  on  American 
lumber  in  the  province  of  New  Brunswick,  and  re- 
ciprocal trade  with  the  British  North  American  col- 
onies on  the  principles  of  liberal  commercial  inter- 
course." 

Finally  the  English  government  determined  to  send 
the  Earl  of  Elgin,  then  governor-general  of  Canada, 
to  Washington.  The  party  on  leaving  England  con- 
sisted only  of  Lord  Elgin,  Mr.  Francis  Hincks,  then 
prime  minister  of  Canada,  Captain  Hamilton,  A.  D. 
C,  and  Lawrence  Oliphant,  private  secretary  of  Lord 
Elgin;  but  at  New  York  it  was  joined  by  Colonel 


'"House  Executive  Documents."    First  Session  Thirty-first  Con- 
gress.   Vol.  VIII,  No.  64,  p.  4.     1819-50. 


431] 


Jhe  Reciprociiy  Treaty  of  1854. 


10 


Bruce  and  one  or  two  Canadians,  whose  advice  and 
assistance  upon  commercial  questions  were  needed.' 

Upon  arriving  at  Washington  Lord  Elgin  announced 
the  object  of  his  visit  to  President  Pierce  and  the 
Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Marcy,  who  told  him  that  it 
was  entirely  hopeless  to  expect  that  such  a  treaty  as 
he  proposed  could  be  carried  through  with  the  oppo- 
sition which  existed  to  it  on  the  part  of  the  Demo- 
crats, who  had  a  majority  in  the  Senate.  They  as- 
sured him,  however,  that  if  he  could  overcome  this 
opposition  he  would  find  no  difficulty  wjth  the  execu- 
tive branch  of  the  government.  With  this  object  in 
view,  the  conversion  of  the  Democratic  majority  in 
the  Senate,  "Lord  Elgin  and  his  staff  approached  the 
representatives  of  the  American  nation  with  all  the 
legitimate  wiles  of  accomplished  and  astute  diplo- 
macy. They  threw  theraiselves  into  the  society  of 
Washington  with  the  abandon  and  enjoyment  of  a 
group  of  visitors  solely  intent  on  pleasure."  "At 
last,  after  several  days  of  uninterrupted  festivity," 
writes  Oliphant,  "I  began  to  perceive  what  we  were 
driving  at.  To  make  quite  sure.  I  said  one  day  to 
my  chief,  'I  find  all  my  most  intimate  friends  are 
Democratic  Senators.'     'So  do  I,'  he  replied  drily."* 

In  a  letter  written  at  the  time  Oliphant  describes 
more  minutely  the  methods  used  by  Lord  Elgin  in  his 
personal  intercourse  with  those  whom  he  wished  to 
bring  over  to  his  side:  "Lord  Elgin  pretends  to 
drink  immensely,  but  I  watched  him,  and  I  don't 
believe  he  drank  a  glass  between  two  and  twelve. 

'These  gentlemen  were  intended  to  act  as  delegates  from  the  dif- 
ferent provinces  to  advise  in  regard  to  matters  concerning  them. 
"Reminiscences  of  Sir  Francis  Hincks."'    pp.  234  and  315. 

^"Episodes  in  a  Life  of  .\dventure."    Lawrence  Oliphant.    1887. 

p.  40.  '    '  ■     '■  :.■:  ■  '    '  • 


16 


The  Reciprocitji  Treat fi  of  1864. 


[432 


He  is  the  most  thorough  diplomat  possible, — never 
loses  sight  for  a  moment  of  his  object,  and  while  he 
is  chaffing  Yankees  and  slapping  them  on  the  back, 
he  is  systematically  pursuing  that  object.  The  con- 
sequence is,  he  is  the  most  popular  Englishman  that 
ever  visited  the  United  States."' 

At  last,  after  about  ten  days  of  social  activity, 
Lord  Elgin  informed  Mr.  Marcy  that  if  the  govern- 
ment was  prepared  to  adhere  to  its  promises  to  con- 
clude a  reciprocity  treaty  with  Canada,  he  could 
assure  the  President  that  a  majority  of  the  Senate 
would  be  found  favorable  to  it.  "Mr.  Marcy,"  says 
Oliphant,  "could  scarcely  believe  his  ears,  and  was 
so  much  taken  aback  that  I  somewhat  doubted  the 
desire  to  make  the  treaty,  which  he  so  strongly  ex- 
pressed on  the  occasion  of  Lord  Elgin's  first  inter- 
view with  him,  when  he  also  pronounced  it  hope- 
less."' The  next  three  days  were  occupied  with  the 
arrangement  of  the  details  of  the  treaty,  which  had 
to  be  hurried  through,  as  Lord  Elgin  was  due  at  the 
seat  of  his  government.^ 

"We  are  tremendously  triumphant;  we  have  signel  a  stunning 
treaty.  When  I  say  we,  it  was  in  the  dead  of  night,  in  the  last  five 
minutes  of  the  fifth  of  June,  and  the  first  five  minutes  of  the  sixth 
day  of  the  month  aforesaid,  that  in  a  spacious  chamber,  by  the  bril- 
liant light  of  six  wax  candles  and  an  Argand,  four  individuals  might 
have  been  observed  seated,  their  faces  expressive  of  deep  and  earnest 
thought  not  unmixed  with  cunning.  Their  feelings,  however,  to 
the  acute  observer,  manifested  themselves  in  different  ways;  and 

•"Life  of  Lawrence  Oliphant,"  by  Mrs.    M.    O.  W.    Oliphant. 
1891.     p.  120. 
^"Episodes  in  a  Life  of  Adventure."    pp.  43-44.  ■     ' 

^The  principal  cause  of  the  failure  of  former  negotiations  arose 
from  the  refusal  of  the  British  government  to  treat,  unless  the 
coal  of  New  Brunswick  and  Nova  Scotia  were  included  in  the  free 
list.  "Reminiscences  of  His  Public  Life,"  by  Sir  Francis  Hincks. 
p.  233.    Montreal.    1884. 


433] 


The  lieciprocilji   Treaty  of  1854. 


17 


this  was  but  natural,  as  two  were  young  and  two  aged,— one,  indeed, 
far  gone  in  years,  the  other  prematurely  so.  He  it  is  whose  meas- 
ured toneH  alone  break  the  solemn  silence  of  midnight,  except  when 
one  of  the  younger  auditors,  who  are  intently  poring  over  volumi- 
nous MSS.,  interrupts  him  1o  interpolate  'and'  or  scratch  out  'the.' 
They  are,  in  fact,  oheckinghim,  and  the  aged  man  listens  while  he 
picks  his  teeth  with  a  pair  of  scissors,  or  clears  out  the  wick  of  the 
candles  with  their  points  and  wipes  them  on  his  hair.  He  may 
occasionally  be  observed  to  wink,  either  from  conscious 'cutoness  or 
unconscious  drowsiness.  Attached  to  these  three  MSS.  by  red  rib- 
bons are  the  heavy  seals.  Presently  the  clock  strikes  twelve,  and 
there  18  a  doubt  whether  to  date  it  to-day  or  yesteiday.  For  a  mo- 
ment there  is  a  solemn  silence,  and  he  who  was  reading  takes  the 
pen,  which  has  previously  been  impressively  dipped  in  the  ink  by 
the  most  intellige  it  of  the  young  men,  who  appears  to  be  his  secre- 
tary, and  who  keeps  his  eyes  wearily  upon  the  other  young  man, 
who  is  the  opposition  secretary,  and  interesting  as  a  specimen  of  a 
Yankee  in  tliat  ca|)acity.  There  is  something  strongly  mysterious 
in  the  scratching  of  that  midnight  pen,  for  it  is  scratching  away  the 
destinies  of  nations;  and  then  it  is  placed  in  the  hands  of  the  venera- 
ble flle,  whose  hand  does  notshake,  tliough  he  is  very  old,  and  knows 
he  will  be  bullied  to  death  by  half  the  members  of  Congress.  The 
hand  that  has  used  a  revolver  upon  previous  occasions  does  not  waver 
with  a  pen,  though  the  lines  he  traces  may  be  an  involver  of  a  revol- 
ver again.  He  is  now  the  Secretary  of  State;  before  that,  a  general 
in  the  army;  before  that,  governor  of  a  state;  before  that  Secretary 
of  War;  before  that,  minister  to  Mexico;  before  that,  a  member  of 
the  House  of  Representatives;  before  that  an  adventurer;  before 
that  a  cabinet-maker.  So  why  should  the  old  man  fear?  Has 
he  not  survived  the  changes  and  chances  of  more  different  sorts  of 
lives  than  any  other  man?  and  is  he  afraid  of  being  done  by  an 
English  lord?  So  he  gives  us  his  blessing,  and  we  leave  the  old  man 
and  his  secretary  with  our  treaty  in  our  pockets." ' 

In  this  rather  grandiloquent  style  Oliphant  de- 
scribed the  signing  of  the  treaty  in  a  letter  written 
to  his  mother  upon  June  7,  1854. 

Doubts  have  been  expressed  as  to  the  means  em- 
ployed in  the  negotiation  of  the  treaty.  Enemies  of 
Lord  Elgin  at  home  and  in  the  provinces  said  that  it 

'"Memoir  of  the  Life  of  Lawrence  Oliphant,  and  Alice  Oliphant, 
his  Wife,"  by  Margaret  0.  W.  Oliphant.    Vol.  I,  pp.  130-132. 
2 


\ 


18 


The  Reciprocity  Treat ij  of  1864. 


[434 


was  bought  with  British  gold.  American  opponents 
of  the  treaty  declared  that  it  was  ''floated  through 
ou  champagne."  While  there  is  no  reason  to  believe 
that  open  bribery  was  used,  there  does  appear  to  be 
ample  evidence  that  the  second  charge  was  well 
founded,  and  Lord  Elgin's  secretary  does  not  hesi- 
tate to  admit  its  substantial  truth,  for  he  says  in 
his  account  of  the  negotiations  that  "without  alto- 
gether admitting  this,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  in 
the  hands  of  a  skillful  diplomatist  that  liquor  is  not 
without  its  value."' 

Although  the  means  used  in  the  negotiation  of  the 
treaty  were  not  such  as  to  reflect  credit  upon  those 
engaged  in  them,  the  preceding  attempts  to  obtain 
reciprocal  trade  privileges  show  that  it  had  a  sub- 
stantial movement  behind  it  and  was  not  merely 
"floated  through  on  champagne."  An  act  to  carry 
the  treaty  into  effect  was  passed  by  Congress  and 
approved  by  the  President,  August  5,  1854.  This  act 
(Thirty-third  Congress,  First  Session,  Chapter  259, 
1854),  provided  that —  •  ■      •     ' 

"  Whenever  the  President  of  the  United  States  shall  receive  sat- 
isfactory evidence  that  the  Imperial  Parliament  of  Great  Britain 
and  the  Provincial  Parliaments  of  Canada,  New  Brunswick,  Nova 
8cotia  and  Prince  li^d  ward's  Island  have  passed  laws  on  their  part  to 
give  full  effect  to  the  provisions  of  the  treaty  between  the  United 

States  and  Great  Britain he  is  hereby  authorized  to 

issue  his  proclamation  declaring  that  he  has  such  evidence,  and 
thereupon,  from  the  date  of  such  proclamation,"  the  provisions  of 
the  treaty  should  take  effect.^ 

The  President  issued  his  proclamation  March  16, 

1855.^ 

'"Life  of  Oliphant,"  p.  109.  "Episodes  in  a  Life  of  Adventure," 
p.  38.      •    •  '  -•      ':'  •   * 

""Statutes  at  Large,"  Vol.  X,  pp.  587-88,  1851-55, 
" "Statutes  at  Large,"  Vol.  10,  p,  1179.    Acts  to  carry  into  effect  the 
treaty  were  passed  by  Canada,  September  23,  1854;  Prince  Edward 


4351 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


19 


For  the  first  few  years  the  treaty  seems  to  have 
been  popular.  The  condition  of  the  country  remained 
prosperous.  In  1857,  however,  came  the  great  crisis 
ot  that  year,  and  before  the  country  had  fairly  re- 
covered from  the  effects  of  that  disturbance,  the 
slavery  question  had  reached  such  a  stage  that  war 
alone  could  settle  it.  The  "irrepressible  conflict" 
came  and  the  reciprocity  treaty  was  doomed.  As 
we  shall  see  later,  the  treaty  was  far  from  satisfac- 
tory, even  to  its  friends,  looking  at  it  from  a  purely 
economic  point  of  view.  But  it  would  never  have 
been  abrogated  on  account  of  its  defects,  for  those 
could  have  been  remedied  by  negotiation.  It  fell  a 
victim  "to  the  anger  which  the  behavior  of  a  party 
in  England  had  excited  in  America."'  Moreover, 
there  were  the  inevitable  commercial  disturbances  of 
a  time  of  war. 

One  slight  attempt  was  made  in  1858  to  extend  re- 
ciprocity; but  it  failed.  The  first  proposition,  made 
May  18,  proposed  to  place  certain  products  upon  a 
footing  with  the  articles  exempted  from  duty  under 
the  reciprocity  treaty  of  1854.  The  second  proposi- 
tion was  in  the  form  of  a  joint  resolution  authorizing 
the  President,  "whenever  he  shall  receive  satisfac- 
tory information  that  hay  and  hops,  being  the  products 
of  the  United  Sates,  and  exported  thence  to  any  of 
the  British  North  American  provinces,  are  admitted 

Island.  October  7,  1864;  New  Brunswick,  November  3,  1854; 
Nova  Scotia,  December  13,  1854;  and  Newfoundland,  July  7, 
1855.  "British  and  Foreign  State  Papers,"  1854-55,  Vol.  XLV,  pp. 
878-884.  The  treaty  passed  the  Colonial  legislatures  with  a  total  of 
only  21  dissentient  votes.  "Episodes  in  a  Life  of  Adventure," 
Oliphant,  pp.  52-53.  The  principal  opposition  came  from  Nova 
Scotia,  and  wag  due  to  the  fisheries  clauses.  "Hinck's  Reminis- 
cences," pp.  233-36. 
'"Canada  and  the  Canadian  Question."    Goldwin  Smith,  p.  141. 


-    J 


20 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


[436 


free  of  duty,  to  issue  his  proclamation  declaring  hay 
and  hops,  the  products  of  those  provinces,  shall  be 
admitted  free  of  duty."' 

In  March,  1860,  the  House  passed  a  resolution  re- 
questing the  President  to  give  it  all  the  information 
in  his  possession  relative  to  the  working  of  the  treaty. 
Particular  information  was  requested  as  to  "Whether 
the  provincial  government  of  Canada  has  not,  through 
its  legislature,  violated  the  spirit  of  said  treaty;  what 
has  been  the  practical  effect  of  the  third  clause  upon 
the  interests  of  the  respective  countries;  what  meas- 
ures, if  any,  have  been  taken  to  procure  correct  in- 
formation touching  the  practical  operation  and  effect 
of  the  third  article  upon  the  interests  of  the  American 
citizens,  and  whether,  in  his  opinion,  the  third  article 
could  not,  with  advantage  to  Amercan  interests,  be 
either  amended  or  rescinded.'' 

From  this  time  on  until  the  final  abrogation  of  the 
treaty,  it  remained  a  frequent  subject  of  controversy 
between  the  friends  and  opponents  of  the  reciprocity 
policy.  Elaborate  reports  were  made  from  time  to 
time  by  the  committee  on  commerce  of  the  House. 
Of  these  reports  the  most  exhaustive  was  that  pre- 
pared by  Elijah  Ward,  of  New  York,  for  the  com- 
mittee on  commerce,  and  presented  to  the  House  on 
February  5,  1862.'  This  report  states  in  a  clear  and 
thorough  manner  the  position  of  the  friends  of  the 
treaty.  Mr.  Ward,  while  criticising  many  of  the 
features  of  the  treaty,  and  especially  referring  to  the 

^  Congremonal  Olobe,  First  Session,  Thirty-fifth  Congress,  pp.  2212 
and  3016.     Part  III. 

^Congressional  Olobe,  First  Session,  Thirty-sixth  Congress,  p.  1357. 
Part  II. 

'"House  Reports  of  Committee,"  Second  Session,  Thirty-seventh 
Congress,  1861-2.    Vol.  Ill,  No.  22. 


437] 


The  Reciprocitii  Treaty  of  1854. 


•n 


hostile  policy  of  Canada  in  discriminating  against 
American  vessels  using  its  canals  under  the  provision 
for  free  navigation,  believed  in  the  general  soundness 
of  the  policy  of  reciprocity,  and  advocated  a  revision 
of  the  treaty, 

In  reply  to  this  report  the  Canadian  minister  of 
finance  made  a  defense  of  the  policy  of  his  prov- 
ince. The  report  took  up  in  detail  the  several  causes 
of  dissatisfaction  mentioned  by  the  Americans.^ 

Besides  the  report  of  1862  and  the  Canadian  reply, 
there  was  a  brief  report  made  in  April,  1864,  from  the 
committee  on  commerce.  This  also  was  the  work  of 
Mr.  Ward,  and  really  formed  a  supplement  to  his  re- 
port of  1862.  Tf,  formed  the  basis  of  the  final  strug- 
gle in  the  House  over  the  abrogation  of  the  treaty. 
The  final  paragraph  recommended — 

"Thai  the  President  be  authorized  to  give  notice  to  the  govern- 
ment of  Great  Britain  that  it  is  the  intention  of  the  government  of 
the  United  States  to  terminate  the  reciprocity  treaty  made  with 

Great  Britain  for  the  British  North  American  provinces 

unless  a  new  convention  shall  be  concluded  between  the  two 
governments,  by  which  the  provisions  shall  be  abrogated  or  so  mod- 
ified as  to  be  mutually  satisfactory  to  both  governments;  and  that 
the  President  be  also  authorized  to  appoint  three  commissioners,  by 
and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  for  the  revision  of 
the  treaty,  and  to  confer  with  other  commissioners  duly  authorized 
therefor,  whenever  it  shall  appear  to  be  the  wish  of  the  government 
of  Great  Britain  to  negotiate  a  new  treaty  between  the  two  govern- 
ments and  the  people  of  both  countries,  based  upon  true  principles 
of  reciprocity,  and  for  the  removal  of  existing  difficulties." - 

The  report  was  accompanied  by  a  joint  resolution-* 
embodying  the  substance  of  the  recommendations  of 
the  committee  on  commerce.     This  joint  resolution 

^"Reportof  Minister  of  Finance  upon  the  Report  of  Committee 
of  Commerce  of  House  of  Representatives."    March,  1862. 

^"Reports  of  Committees."  First  Session  Thirty-eighth  Congress, 
1863-4,  Vol.  I,  No.  39. 

■^  CongrtMional  Gfc6«,  First  Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  1863-4, 
p.  1387. 


V 


22 


Tlie  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


[438 


was  the  subject  of  the  debate  in  the  House  upon 
the  abrogation  of  the  treaty  on  May  18-19  and  May 
24-26.  In  this  debate  Mr.  Ward  acted  as  the  leader 
of  the  friends  of  the  treaty,  making  two  able  speeches 
in  its  favor,  at  the  opening  and  closing  of  the  debate 
respectively.  He  was  supported  by  Isaac  N.  Arnold 
of  Illinois,  Thomas  D.  Eliot  of  Massachusetts, 
John  V.  L.  Pruyn  and  Thomas  T.  Davif%  of  New 
York,  Rufus  P.  Spaulding  of  Ohio,  J.  C.  Allen 
of  Illinois,  and  L.  D.  M.  Sweat  of  Maine.  Justin  S. 
Morrill  of  Vermont  led  the  opposition,  assisted  by 
Frederick  A.  Pike  of  Maine,  Francis  W.  Kellogg  of 
Michigan,  and  Portus  Baxter  of  Vermont.  The  mer- 
its of  the  debate  were  certainly  with  the  friends  of 
the  treaty,  for  the  opposition  contented  itself  with 
denunciation  of  the  treaty,  and  with  invectives 
against  the  unfriendly  policy  of  Great  Britain. 

Mr.  Arnold,  of  Illinois,  offered  an  amendment  to 
the  resolution  proposed  by  the  committee  on  com- 
merce. This  amendment  authorized  the  President  to 
use  his  discretion  in  abrogating  the  treaty  in  case  of 
a  failure  in  the  negotiation  of  a  revised  treaty  satis- 
factory to  both  governments.'  Mr.  Morrill  of  Ver- 
mont proposed  an  amendment  in  the  nature  of  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  resolution  of  the  committee  on  com- 
merce. This  provided  for  an  unconditional  abroga- 
tion of  the  treaty.* 

On  May  26,  1864,  the  House  voted  upon  the  three 
propositions  before  it.  Mr.  Arnold's  amendment  was 
defeated  by  a  vote  of  64  to  97.  Mr.  Morrill's  substi- 
tute met  the  same  fate  by  a  vote  of  74  to  82.     The 


.    '  Congr»8sional  Olobe,  First  Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  1863-4, 
p.  2455. 
"Same,  p.  2364.    . 


^v^W_ 


439] 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


23 


original  resolution  of  the  committee  was  finally  post- 
poned to  the  second  Tuesday  in  December  by  a  vote 
of  77  to  72,  after  having  been  read  a  third  time.  A 
motion  to  lay  the  resolution  on  the  table  failed  by  a 
vote  of  73  to  76.' 

On  December  13,  1864,  the  House  took  up  the  joint 
resolution  and  passed  it  by  a  vote  of  85  to  57,  forty 
members  not  voting.  A  good  deal  of  party  manoeu- 
vering  preceded  the  final  vote,  the  opposition  led  by 
Mr.  Morrill  attempting  to  substitute  a  resolution  for 
unconditional  abrogation. 

The  second  great  debate  upon  the  resolution  occur- 
red in  the  Senate  in  January,  1865. 

On  December  14,  1864,  the  Senate  received  the 
resolution  from  the  House  and  referred  it,  after  a 
short  debate,  to  the  committee  on  foreign  relations. 
Senator  Grimes  of  Iowa  moved  that  the  resolution  be 
referred  to  the  committee  on  commerce,  as  "it  refers 
to  commercial  relations  existing  between  this  country 
and  the  provinces  of  Great  Britain."  In  reply  Sena- 
tor Sumner  said  that  "every  question  of  commerce 
between  the  two  countries,  even  if  it  is  the  subject  of 
negotiation,  must  be  referred  to  the  committee  on 
commerce,  and  you  may  as  well  dismiss  your  com- 
mittee on  foreign  relations."  Finally  the  resolution 
was  referred  to  the  committee  on  foreign  affairs. 

This  action  of  the  Senate  indicates  the  way  in  which 
the  measure  was  to  be  considered.  Instead  of  treat- 
ing the  matter  as  one  of  commercial  relations,  the  Sen- 
ate proceeded  to  act  upon  it  as  a  political  measure. 

'  House  debate,  Congressional  Olobe,  First  Session,  Thirty-eighth 
Congress,  Part  III,  May  18,  2333-38;  May  19,  2364-71;  May  24,  2452- 
56;  May  25,  247fi-84;  May  26,  2502-09. 

-Congressional  Olobe,  Second  Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  1864- 
65,  p.  35. 


■  ,■■  / 


H  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  [440 

As  I  have  already  said,  this  was  the  attitude  of  the 
opponents  of  the  treaty  throughout  the  whole  discus- 
sion. 

The  committee  on  foreign  relations,  through  Mr. 
Sumner,  reported  an  amendment  to  the  original  reso- 
lution, providing  for  the  unconditional  abrogation  of 
the  treaty.' 

The  debate  upon  the  amendment  lasted  through  the 
two  days,  January  11-12,  1865,  and  ended  with  the 
passage  of  the  measure  on  the  latter  day  by  a  vote  of 
33  to  8. 

The  debate  was  long  and  thorough.  The  opposi- 
tion excelled  in  the  brilliancy  of  its  speakers.  Charles 
Sumner,  John  Sherman,  Jacob  Collamer  and  Solomon 
Foot  of  Vermont,  Zachariah  Chandler  of  Michigan, 
James  R.  Doolittle  of  Wisconsin,  ISTathan  A.  Farwell 
of  Maine,  and  John  Conness  of  California,  spoke  for 
the  abrogation.  John  P.  Hale  of  New  Hampshire, 
Alexander  Ramsey  of  Minnesota,  Timothy  O.  Howe 
of  Wisconsin,  and  Thomas  A.  Hendricks  of  Indiana 
opposed  the  abrogation. 

The  prestige  of  distinguished  services  was  certainly 
with  the  opposition,  but  the  strength  of  solid  argu- 
ment rested  with  the  friends  of  the  treaty.  Said 
Senator  John  P.  Hale,  in  concluding  his  speech''  in 
favor  of  a  revision  of  the  treaty: 

"  If  the  treaty  is  imperfect  and  needs  amendment,  that  [the  pro- 
posed amendment  for  revision]  is  the  true,  statesmanlike,  Christian 
way  of  annulling  it.  .  .  .  But  if,  on  the  other  hand,  smarting  as  we 
now  are  under  what  we  believe  and  feel  to  be  injustice  on  the  part  of 
these  colonies,  we  resort  to  this  legislation  at  this  time,  inthishour, 
under  such  impulses,  it  will  tend  to  increase  and  intensify  all  the 

^Congresidonal  Globe,  Second  Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  pp. 
71  and  95-97. 

'^Congressional  'Jlobe,  Second  Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  1864- 
65.    Part  I.  pp.  204-00. 


441]  The  Reciprocitjj  Treaty  of  1854.  26 

bad  feelings  that  have  unhappily  existed;  will,  in  fact,  retard,  if  not 
render  utterly  impossible  any  future  progress  in  the  line  of  reci- 
procity between  these  two  countries." 

A  brief  quotation  from  the  speech  of  an  opponent 
will  indicate  the  spirit  with  which  the  treaty  was  at- 
tacked.    Said  Senator  Jacob  Collamer  of  Vermont: 

"  I  acknowledge  that  I  have  some  prejudice  against  this  treaty.  I 
am  a  little  situated  as  my  old  neighbor  .Tudge  Cbipman  was  when 
he  was  called  upon  to  testify  whether  a  certain  witness  was  a  man 
of  truth.  He  said  he  was  not.  He  was  then  asked,  'Sir,  are  you 
not  confcious  that  you  labor  under  a  prejudice  against  that  man?' 
He  answered,  'I  think  it  likely  that  I  am,  I  have  detected  him  steal- 
ing two  or  three  times.'  "' 

Justice  to  the  opponents  of  the  treaty  requires  it  to 

be  said  that  the  quotation  just  cited  is  an  extreme 

example  of  the  opinions  of  that  party.     The  address 

of  the  late  Hannibal  Hamlin  before  the  commercial 

convention  at  Detroit,  in  July,   1865,   indicates  the 

opinions  of  the  more  moderate  opponents  of  the  treaty. 

He  said: 

"I  was  educated  in  the  school  of  free  trade, — not  free  trade  in 
slices.  I  affirm  that  that  is  the  most  obnoxious  system  of  legis- 
lation that  can  be  devised  by  man.     I  am  for  free  trade 

But  what  do  I  mean  by  free  trade?  Not  that  system  which  selects 
a  few  articles  and  makes  them  entirely  free,  rendering  it  necessary 
that  you  shall  impose  additional  revenue  upon  other  articles  in  order 
to  make  up  for  the  deficiency.  That  is  free  trade  in  slices,  and  it 
cannot  be  defended  upon  any  principle  of  political  economy  ever 
enunciated  by  any  man."- 

On  January  16,  1865,  the  House  concurred  in  the 
amendment  of  the  Senate  to  the  joint  resolution.  The 
resolution,  as  finally  passed,  proposed  an  uncondi- 
tional abrogation  of  the  treaty,   <'as  it  is  no  longer 

'  Congressional  Olobe,  Second  Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  1864- 
65,  Part  I.  p.  210.  For  debates  January  11-12,  1865,  pp.  204-13  and 
pp.  222-34. 

-See  pp.  59-61.  The  speech  is  given  in  the  "Proceedings"  of  the 
convention,  p.  100. 


110  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  UU.  [442 

for  the  interests  of  the  United  States  to  continue  the 
same  in  force."*  This  resolution  received  the  ap- 
proval of  the  President,  January  18,  1865.2  The  treaty 
terminated  March  17,  1866. 

Delegates  from  Canada,  New  Brunswick  and  Nova 
Scotia  arrived  at  Washington  January  24,  1866,  and 
remained  there  until  February  6.  The  delegates  were 
A.  J.  Gait,  minister  of  finance,  and  W.  P.  Rowland, 
postmaster-general,  representing  Canada;  A.  J.  Smith, 
attorney-general  of  New  Brunswick,  and  W.  A.  Henry, 
attorney-general  of  Nova  Scotia.  After  many  days 
discussion  the  negotiations  terminated  unsuccess- 
fully.:* 

The  unsuccessful  attempt  at  renewal  made  by  the 
provincial  delegates  was  followed  by  an  equally  un- 
successful attempt  to  continue  a  semblance  of  reci- 
procity by  means  of  legislation.  During  the  last 
week  in  February  a  bill  with  such  an  object  in  view, 
was  introduced  in  the  House  by  Mr.  Justin  S.  Morrill, 
chairman  of  the  committee  on  ways  and  means,  and 
was  debated  on  March  6,  7,  9,  12.  But  even  a  bill, 
which  offered  terms  that  could  only  be  called  recip- 

^Uongreisional  Qlobe,  Second  Session  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  Part 
1,  p.  277. 

The  best  speeches  in  favor  of  the  revision  of  the  treaty,  delivered 
in  the  Senate,  were  those  of  John  P.  Hale,  Congressional  Olobe, 
Second  Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  pp.  204-06,  and  Timothy 
O.  Howe,  Qlobe,  pp  211-13,  and  pp.  226-29.  These  two  speeches, 
with  the  two  speeches  of  Mr.  Ward,  delivered  in  the  House  May 
18  and  26,  1864  (see  p.  22),  state  clearly  and  forcibly  the  views 
of  the  friends  of  the  treaty. 

^''Statutes  at  Large,"  Second  Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  p. 
566. 

"'Canada  and  the  States,"  Sir  E.  W.  Watkin,  pp.  405-13.  Con- 
tains report  of  the  delegates,  their  proposals,  the  counter  proposals 
of  the  committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  and  finally  the  reply  of 
I    .  the  delegates. 


443]  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  27 

rocal  by  *< political"  license,  had  no  chance  of  success 
in  the  existing  state  of  opinion  in  Congress  and  in 
the  country.  Mr.  Morrill  set  the  keynote  of  the  de- 
bate when  he  said  in  his  speech  at  the  opening  of  the 
discussion,  that  "the  treaty  was  an  ill-omened  one 
from  the  start,  having  been  first  extorted  from  us  by 
the  armed  raid  upon  our  fishermen  in  1852,  made  by 
the  combined  armaments  of  the  provinces,  and  led  on 
by  the  imperial  government;  and  secondly,  won  from 
us  by  the  delusion  that  favor  would  beget  fraternity. 
We  are  too  old  to  be  again  deluded,  and  being  quite 
able  to  withstand  a  bite,  we  shall  be  less  likely  to 
yield  to  a  growl."'  A  few  believed  that  the  wiser 
policy  was  to  cultivate  friendly  relations  with  the 
provinces,  but  the  majority  thought  otherwise,  and 
the  bill  failed  to  pass.  One  of  the  minority  said 
during  the  debate  that — 

"  He  would  not  have  risen,  ....  if  he  had  not  voted  last 
year,  with  others,  for  an  abrogation  of  the  reciprocity  treaty,  and 
if  he  did  not  lee  now,  from  the  tendencies  and  sympathies  of  the 
House,  that  the  moment  the  bill  passed  from  the  hands  of  the  com- 
mittee of  the  whole  it  would  receive  its  final  death  blow.  He  did  not 
believe  that  there  would  have  been  thirty  votes  obtained  in  this 
House  last  year  for  the  abrogation  of  the  reciprocity  treaty  with 
Canada,  but  for  the  explicit  understanding  that  some  sort  of  re- 
ciprocity in  trade  would  be  forthwith  re-established,  either  through 
the  treaty-making  power,  or  through  the  legislative  power  of  the 
government.  The  people  of  the  United  States  were  ground  down 
by  the  internal  revenue  taxation,  and  he  had  not  felt  at  liberty  to 
let  the  reciprocity  treaty  stand,  without  being  at  liberty  to  make 
some  sort  of  bargain  with  the  people  of  Canada,  that  whatever  our 
internal  revenues  might  be,  the  same  would  be  levied,  either  by 
them  or  by  us,  on  our  imports  from  them.  It  was  exclusively  on  that 
understanding  that  he  had  voted  for  the  abrogation  of  the  treaty. 
And  he  now  saw  in  the  additional  claims  of  those  who  repre- 
sented the  lumber  interests,  and  the  coal  and  other  interests  of  the 
country,  that  advantage  was  to  be  taken  of  the  present  opportu- 

^ Congressional  Globe,  1865-66,  IV.     «h  6,  1866,  p.  1210. 


■■:^ 


. 


>v 


28  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  [444 

nity,  and  that  never   again  were    we   to    have   reciprocity   with 

the  neiKhboring  provinces If  that  were  to  be  so,  he 

never  should  regret  any  vote  that  he  gave  in  his  life  as  he  would 
regret  his  vote  of  last  winter,  to  abrogate  the  treaty.  He  had 
given  it  with  the  understanding  that  it  should  be  substantially 
renewed,'" 

Why  was  the  treaty  abrogated  ?  Charles  Francis 
Adams,-  minister  to  Great  Britain,  wrote  February 
2,  1865,  to  Secretary  Seward  that  in  his  belief  "all 
these  measures  [for  abrogation]  were  the  result 
rather  of  a  strong  political  feeling  than  of  any  com- 
mercial considerations.  I  should  not  disguise  the 
fact  of  the  prevalence  of  great  irritation  in  conse- 
quence of  the  events  that  had  taken  place  in  Canada; 
neither  should  I  conceal  my  regret,  as  it  seemed  to 
me  to  be  one  of  the  cardinal  points  of  our  policy,  both 
in  a  political  and  commercial  sense,  to  maintain  the 
most  friendly  relations  with  the  whole  population 
along  our  northern  border." 

Senator  Wilson,  of  Massachusetts,  said  in  the  Sen- 
ate, January  12,  1865: 

"When  this  treaty  was  negotiated  it  was  believed  to  be  for  the 
general  interests  of  the  country,  and  in  Massachusetts  it  was  espe- 
cially believed  to  be  for  our  fishing,  manufacturing,  commercial 
and  railroad  interests.  I  have  ever  been  in  favor  of  the  treaty,  and 
up  to  this  time  could  never  have  been  induced  to  vote  against  it.  I 
am  not  clear  now  that  it  is  not  for  the  interests  of  the  state  I  in  part 
represent  to  let  it  stand.  I  am  inclined  to  think  it  is  for  our  interest 
that  the  treaty  should  stand  as  it  now  does.  For  the  interests  of  the 
whole  country  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  it  ought  to  be  modified  or 
per h  aps  abrogat  ed . "  ' 

^ Congrtsaional  Globe.  Part  II,  1865-66.  March  7,  1866,  p.  1250. 
For  the  debate  see  Globe  1865-66,  February  27,  March  6,  7,  S,  12, 
1866,  pp.  1867,  1210-20,  1241-51,  1297-1302,  1333-43. 

-''House  Executive  Documents,"  First  Session  Thirty-ninth 
Congress,  Vol.  I,  Part  I,  p.  111. 

'Congressional  Globe,  Second  Session  Thirty -eighth  Congress,  Fart 
I,  p.  233. 


445] 


The  Reciprocal/  Treaty  of  1854. 


29 


A  convention  composed  of  boards  of  trade  and 
chambers  of  commerce  of  the  United  States  and 
British  North  American  provinces  met  at  Detroit 
July  11-14,  1805,  by  invitation  of  the  local  board  of 
trade,  to  protest  against  the  abrupt  termination  of 
the  reciprocity  treaty.  This  convention  was  com- 
posed of  business  men  and  others,  representing  the 
leading  commercial  bodies  of  the  country.  Repre- 
sentatives were  present  from  New  York,  Michigan, 
Massachusetts,  Maine,  Illinois,  Ohio,  Canada  (west). 
Prince  Edward  Island,  Pennsylvania,  Nova  Scotia, 
Canada  (east),  Wisconsin,  Minnesota,  Missouri,  New 
Brunswick.  Among  these  were  Lyman  Tremain, 
John  V.  L.  Pruyn,  late  chancellor  of  the  University 
of  the  State  of  New  York,  and  Martin  Townsend,  of 
New  York;  Frederick  Tarley,  afterward  president  of 
the  national  board  of  trade;  John  Welsh,  afterward 
minister  to  Great  Britain;  A.  G.  Cattell  and  William 
Elder,  of  Pennsylvania;  Joseph  S,  Ropes,  James  E. 
Converse  and  W.  W.  Greenough,  of  Massachusetts; 
Morrison  R.  Waite,  afterward  chief  justice  of  the 
supreme  court  of  Ohio;  James  F.  Joy,  of  Michigan, 
and  others.  The  convention  came  "to  substantial 
unanimity  and  they  united  in  urging  upon  the  gov- 
ernment at  Washington  the  great  importance  of 
immediately  opening  negotiations  with  the  British 
government  for  a  new  arrangement,  at  the  least  as 
liberal  on  both  sides  as  the  one  about  to  expire  had 
been,  and  as  much  broader  as  should  appear  practi- 
cable. Their  action  was  approved  by  every  board 
of  trade  atid  chamber  of  commerce  in  the  country 
taking  any  interest  in  the  matter;  it  was  disapproved, 
so  far  as  we  ever  heard,  by  none."^ 

'"Proceedings  of  the  Commercial   Convention  held  in  Detroit 
July  11-14,  1865."     Detroit,  1865.    I  am  indebted  to  the  son  of  the 


30      '  Tlie  Kecijprocity  Treaty  of  1864.  [44  G 

*         ^  I  .    ,  ■  •■■■ 

And  yet  Mr.  Lamed,  in  his  report'  in  1871  declares 
that  the  treaty  was  "justly  abrogated  in  1806  with 
the  very  general  sanction  of  public  opinion  in  the 
country."  Do  the  opinions  of  a  minister  to  England, 
of  a  senator  of  the  United  States  and  of  a  conven- 
tion of  representative  business  men,  count  for  noth- 
ing ?« 


*  The  Working  of  the  Treaty. 

Of  the  effect  of  the  treaty  upon  the  commerce  of 
the  two  countries  Senator  Sumner  said  in  a  speech 
delivered  in  the  Senate  in  January,  1865,  in  favor  of 
its  abrogation  : 

"This  has  increased  immensely,  but  it  is  difficult  to  gay  how  much 
of  this  increase  is  due  to  the  treaty  and  how  much  is  due  to  the 
natural  growth  of  population  and  the  facilities  of  transportation 
in  both  countries.  If  it  could  be  traced  exclusively,  or  in  any  large 
measure,  to  the  treaty,  it  would  be  an  element  not  to  be  disregarded. 
But  it  does  not  follow,  fjom  the  occurrence  of  this  measure  after  the 
treaty  that  it  is  on  accoxmt  of  the  treaty.  Post  hoc  ergo  propter  hoc 
is  too  loose  a  rule  for  our  government  on  the  present  ocrasion  "■' 
late  Joseph  C.  Bates,  of  Boston,  for  the  loan  of  a  scrap-book  con- 
taining clippings  from  newspaper  editorials  written  by  Mr.  Bates. 
I  quote  above  from  one  of  these  editorials. 

^"House  Executive  Documents,"  1870-71,  Vol.  VIIT,  No.  94,  p.  6. 

^It  is  difflcult  to  determine  the  real  attitude  of  the  principal  par- 
ties in  regard  to  reciprocity.  The  bill  providing  for  reciprocity 
with  Canada,  passed  in  the  House  in  1848,  was  reported  by  a  Whig 
committee  and  passed  in  a  House  containing  a  Whig  majority. 
On  the  other  hand  the  same  bill  failed  in  the  Democratic  S'enate, 
and  the  opposition  of  another  Democratic  Penate  threatened  to 
cause  the  collapse  of  the  negotiations  in  1854.  The  other  attempts 
to  bring  about  reciprocity  by  legislation,  and  the  first  negotiation 
of  a  treaty  was  carried  out  by  Democrats.  Furthermore  the  sup- 
port of  the  policy  of  reciprocity  in  1864-65  came  from  the  Demo- 
crats, while  the  Republicans  opposed  it.  Throughout  the  period 
the  slavery  question,  or  questions  connected  with  it,  determined 
the  attitude  of  parties  upon  questions  of  less  pressing  importance. 

^Congressional  Olobe,  1864-65,  p.  206.    January  11,  1865.  .  .     ,  .  . 

■■t---.:.v- 


447]  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  /  /     If 

-  Before  beginning  a  discussion  of  the  effects  of  the 
treaty  three  points  must  be  insisted  upon:  (1)  In 
a  discussion  based  upon  statistics,  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  figures  used  are  not  mathematically 
accurate.  Therefore  conclusions  drawn  from  them 
are  subject  to  some  qualification,  although  it  is  not 
intended  to  deal  with  distinctions  so  fine  that  they 
are  likely  to  be  affected  by  occasional  inaccuracies  in 
the  details  of  the  statistics.  (2)  The  treaty  was  only 
one  of  several  causes  at  work  at  the  same  time  upon 
the  commerce  of  the  two  countries.  The  increase  of 
population,  the  improvement  in  the  means  of  trans- 
portation through  the  building  of  canals  and  rail- 
roads, and  the  development  of  manufacturing  indus- 
tries, were  acting  upon  trade  as  never  before  in  the 
history  of  the  world.  (3)  The  working  of  the  treaty 
was  disturbed  by  two  economic  events,  the  crisis  of 
1857  and  the  civil  war  of  1861-65. 

In  sixty-four  years,   1821  to  1885,  the  total  trade 
(exports  and  imports  combined)  between  the  United      ""'' 
States   and   the    British   provinces,    increased    from 
$2,500,495   to   $88,214,020.     The   trade'   by   decades  "^ 

has  been  as  follows: 

1821 $2,500,495  1861 $51,246,224 

1831 4,926,747  1871 59,727,723 

1841 8,624,750  1881 87,030,472 

.  1851 19,543,469 

•  The  increase  of  trade-  by  decades  has  been  as  fol- 
lows: 

"  1321-1831 $2,426,252       1861-1861 31,701,755 

1831-1841 3.698,003        1861-1871 8,482,499 

'1841-1861..........  10,918,719        1871-1881 27,302,749 

''rhat  is  the  amount  of  the  total  trade  in  each  tenth  year. 

^Thatis,  the  amount  of  increase  in  the  total  trade  in  1831  over 
1821,  1841  over  1831,  so  on.  For  the  statistics  of  trade  from  1821-85 
see  Appendix,  p.  59-61. 


»^. 


y , 


ttl  The  Jiecijn'ocify  Treat!/  of  I85i.  [448 

These  figures  show  that  the  trade  was  compara- 
tively small  up  to  1840:  that  the  decade  from  1841- 
51  witnessed  the  beginning  of  the  great  development 
of  the  last  fifty  years;  that  the  decade  from  1851  to 
18(51  was  marked  by  the  greatest  increase  of  trade 
which  has  taken  place  down  to  1881;  and  that  the 
decade  from  18(51-71  saw  the  smallest  increase  since 
that  of  ]8:U-41.  The  decade  1851-61  included  a  por- 
tion of  the  period  influenced  by  the  reciprocity  treaty, 
while  that  of  1801-71  covered  the  period  of  its  abro- 
gation, and  of  the  disturbance  caused  by  the  civil 
war. 

For  the  twelve  years  of  the  continuance  of  the 
treaty  the  total  trade  year  by  year  was  as  follows: 

1855 $49,000,000  1861 $50,000,000 

1856  57,000,000  1882 48,000,000 

1857 49,000,006  1863 46,000,000 

1858 37,000,000  1864 

1859 ..  45,000,000  1865 60,000,000 

1860 48,000,000  1866 75,000,000 

These  figures  show  the  effect  of  the  treaty  very 
clearly.  The  total  trade  for  the  last  year  before  the 
treaty  was  $34,899,544,  while  for  the  first  year  of 
the  treaty  it  was  $57,041,594,'  an  increase  of  $22,- 
142,050  for  the  first  year  under  the  treaty  com- 
pared with  an  increase  of  $9,184,896  during  three 
years  (1850-53)  before  the  treaty.  Under  the  favor- 
able conditions  furnished  by  the  reciprocity  treaty, 
the  trade  increased  more  than  twice  as  much  in  one 
year  as  it  had  in  there  years  without   the   treaty. 


'I  take  the  year   1856  because  it  was  the   first  full  year,  the 
treity  going  into  effect  March  16,  1855. 


449]  The  lieci/nocifi/   Treat n  of  18r)4.  33 


'r^ 


Phis  increaHed  trado  continued  with  the  usual  fluc- 
tuations during  the  continuance  of  the  treaty: 

r  1868 $^17,905,673 

Total  Trade  \  i8(50 49,444,196 

under  Troaty  of  1854.  )  1862 48,888,897 

\  1865 60,633,561 

f  1844 18,181,618 

Total  Trade  J  1846 9,344,150 

before  the  Treaty.  1  1848 12,029.122 

U8oO 16,788,141 

[  1867 $50,283,464 

Total  Trade  )   |868 48,906,613 

after  the  Treaty.  )  1870 68,134,776 

U872 70,088,925 

r  1875 $76,508,092 

Total  Trade  \  1877 76.732,919 

under  the  Treaty  of  1871.  •     1  1879 (i9,677,055 

\  1882 103,976,742 

An  examination  of  the  preceding  figures  shows 
that  the  abrogation  of  the  treaty  did  not  seriously 
disturb  the  amount  of  trade.  At  least  the  effect  was 
not  permanent;  for  the  trade  had  begun  to  recover 
before  the  negotiation  of  the  treaty  of  1871.  Of 
course  a  considerable  portion  of  this  increase  may 
have  been  due,  and  undoubtedly  was  due,  to  the  nat- 
ural increase  of  business,  the  result  of  the  increase 
of  wealth  and  of  improvements  in  production  and 
transportation,  but  is  it  not  likely  that  the  perma- 
nent effects  of  the  treaty  had  something  to  do  with 
this  increase?  May  not  the  influence  of  the  treaty 
have  developed  a  trade  which  continued  after  its 
expiration?  It  seems  probable  to  me,  and  if  true, 
gives  to  the  reciprocity  treaty  of  1854  an  importance 
which  has  never  been  recognized. 

Besides  the  effect  of  the  treaty,  as  shown  by  the 
increase  of  trade,  the  amount  of  the  imports  into  the 

'Went  into  effect  July  1,  1873. 
3 


84  The  lieciyroatj/  Treaty  of  1854.  [450 

United  States  for  1806  (the  last  year  of  the  operation 
of  the  treaty),  $48,528,628,  gives  ground  for  the  con- 
jecture that  this  unusually  large  quantity  was  due  to 
the  desire  of  business  men  to  profit  as  much  as  pos- 
sible by  the  treaty.  There  are  two  reasons  for  this 
conjecture:  (1)  because  the  fiscal  year  ending  June 
80,  1866,  was  not  coincident  with  the  existence  of  the 
treaty,  which  terminated  March  17,  1866.  Conse- 
quently this  excessive  importation  was  the  work  of 
less  than  nine  months.  (2)  This  amount  of  importa- 
tion was  not  again  reached  until  1882,  when  $50,775,- 
581  of  goods  were  imported  from  the  Dominion  of 
Canada. ' 

Mr.  Larned,  in  his  "Report  on  Trade  with  the 
British  North  American  Provinces,"  says  that — 

"To  a  remarkable  extent  our  present  trade  witli  the  provinces 
is  what  might  be  characterized  as  a  pnre  commerce  of  Cx^nvenience, 
incident  merely  to  the  economical  distribution  of  products  which  are 
common  to  both  countries.  Wo  exchange  with  them  almost  equal 
quantities  of  the  cereals,  and  almost  equal  quantities,  on  an  average 
of  tlour.  Except  so  far  as  concerns  the  barley  that  we  buy  and  the 
Indian  corn  that  we  sell  to  thfcin,  tliis  trade  orignates  on  neither 
side  in  any  necessity,  but  is  chiefly  a  matter  of  simple  conveni- 
ence, of  economy  in  carriage,  or  of  diversification  in  the  qualities 
of  grain.  Similarly  and  for  the  like  reasons  we  exchange  with  them 
about  equal  quantities  of  coal.  We  sell  them  a  certain  quantity  of 
hides  and  skins,  and  buy  half  that  quantity  of  the  same  articles  back 
from  them.  On  the  other-  hand,  they  sell  us  provisions  and  wool 
and  buy  our  provisions  Knd  wool  to  half  the  amount  in  return. 
Not  less  than  one-third,  probably,  of  the  trade  now  carried  on 
between  the  United  States  and  the  neighboring  provinces  is  of 
that  character,  and  the  f;  ct  that  it  is  kept  up  with  so  little 
diminution,  notwithstanding  the  imposition  of  duties  on  both  sides 
of  the  frontier,  is  significant  of  the  value  of  the  advantages  that 
are  found  in  it."^         _____  _ 

'Another  reason  for  the  large  imports  in  1865-66  has  been  sug- 
gested to  me  by  Professor  Taussig:  high  prices  in  the  United  States 
due  to  paper  money  infiation,  while  yet  there  was  gold  in  the 
country  for  export. 

^"House  Executive  Documents,"  1870-71,  Vol.  VIII,  No.  94, 
p.  15. 


451] 


The  Reciprocity  Treat n  of  1854. 


35 


This  "commerce  of  convenience"  is  natural 
enough  when  we  consider  the  geograpical  relations 
of  the  two  countries.  The  British  provinces  are  by 
nature  divided  into  groups  bearing  a  closer  relation 
to  adjacent  portions  of  the  United  States  than  to  the 
other  parts  of  the  British  possessions.  The  maritime 
provinces  are  more  intimately  connected  with  the 
neighboring  New  England  states  than  with  the  Can- 
adas,  Ontario  and  Quebec,  while  the  Canadas  in  their 
turn  find  tlieir  easiest  communication  with  the  mid- 
dle states  of  the  Union.  This  grouping  of  the  various 
provinces  has  received  still  greater  emphasis  by  the 
rapid  development  of  the  western  provinces  of  the 
dominion,  a  development  hardly  begun  at  the  time 
of  the  reciprocity  treaty. 

The  same  reason  for  a  ••commerce  of  convenience" 

appears  when  we  examine  the  economic  relations  of 

the  two  countries.     On  this  point    Goldwin    Smith 

says: 

"Let  any  one  scan  the  economical  map  of  the  North  American 
continent,  with  its  adjacent  waters,  mark  its  northern  zone  abound- 
ing in  minerals,  in  bituminous  coal,  in  himber,  in  fish,  as  well  as 
in  special  farm  products,  brought  in  the  north  to  hardier  perfection, 
of  all  of  which  the  southern  people  have  need;  then  let  him  look  to 
its  southern  regions,  the  natural  products  of  which,  as  well  as  the 
manufactures  produced  in  its  wealthy  centres  of  industry,  are  needed 
by  the  people  of  the  northern  zone;  he  will  see  that  the  continent 
is  an  economic  whole,  and  that  to  run  a  customs  line  athwart  it  and 
try  to  sever  its  members  from  each  other,  is  to  wage  a  desperate  war 
against  nature.'" 

Furthermore  a  "commerce  of  convenience"  is  not 
the  only  necessary  commerce  between  the  United 
States  and  the  provinces.  The  maritime  provinces 
have  lumber,   bituminous  coal  and  fish  which  they 


''•Canada  and  the  Canadian  Question." 
don,  18yi.     pp.  283-84. 


Goldwin  Smith.     Lon- 


86  The  Reciprocity  Treatxj  of  1854.  [452 

desire  to  sell,  and  New  England  is  anxious  to  buy. 
The  Canadas,  Ontario  and  Quebec,  produce  barley, 
eggs,  and  other  farm  products;  horses,  cattle  and 
lumber,  for  the  sale  of  which  they  look  to  New  York 
and  other  neighboring  states.  All  the  provinces  want 
to  get  American  manufactures  as  well  as  the  products 
of  a  more  southerly  climate  in  return. 

The  argument  of  the  opponents  of  reciprocity,  that 
there  cannot  be  profitable  commerce  between  Canada 
and  the  United  States,  because  their  products  are  the 
same,  is  not  true.  The  United  States  includes  regions 
and  productions  almost  tropical.  Canada  has  bitu- 
minous coal,  which  is  needed  in  parts  of  the  United 
States,  and  an  abundance  of  nickel,  of  which  there 
is  but  little  in  the  United  States.  Canada  has  a  vast 
supply  of  lumber,  and  the  United  States  needs  all  that 
it  can  get.  Both  countries  produce  barley,  but  the 
Canadian  barley  is  the  best  for  making  beer.  ^ 

"High  as  the  tariff  wall  between  Canada  and  the 
United  State  is,  trade  has  climbed  over  it."  In  1889 
the  trade  between  Canada  and  the  United  States  was 
greater  than  that  between  Canada  and  any  other 
country,  and  nearly  as  great  as  that  between  Canada 
and  all  the  countries  in  the  world  put  together.* 

The  treaty  was  intended  to  provide  for  the  ex- 
change of  natural  products  between  the  two  coun- 
tries, and  with  very  few  exceptions  these  products 
were  in  the  crudest  possible  condition,  just  as  they 
were  taken  from  the  field  or  forest,  or  dug  from  the 
soil,  or  obtained  frcm  the  sea.     They  were  raw  ma- 


i"The  Canadian  Question,"  p.  287-88. 

-1889— Canada  and  Great  Britain,  $38,105,126  exports,  142,249,555 
imports;  Canada  and  the  United  States,  $48,522,404  exports,  $56,- 
368,990  imports. 


. 


453]  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  87 

terials  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  word,  and  may  be 
grouped  under  five  heads:  products  of  the  mine,  of 
the  forest,  of  the  sea,  animal  products  and  agricul- 
tural produce. 

Products  of  the  Mine. — 

Coal,  ores  of  metals  of  all  kinds ;  stone  or 
marble,  un wrought ;  grindstones,  wrought  and 
unwrought ;  slate ;  gypsum,  ground  and  un- 
ground. 

Products  of  the  Forest. — 

Timber  and  lumber,  round,  hewed,  sawed ; 
firewood  ;  pitch,  tar  and  turpentine. 

Products  of  the  Sea. — 

Fish  and  fish  products. 

Animal  products. — 

Animals  of  all  kinds  ;  meats,  fresh,  smoked, 
salted ;  hides,  furs,  skins,  undressed ;  poultry, 
eggs,  butter,  cheese,  tallow,  lard,  horns,  ma- 
nures, pelts,  wool. 

Agricultural  products. — 

Grain,  flour  and  breadstuffs ;  cotton-wool, 
seeds  and  vegetables  ;  dried  and  undried  fruits  ; 
plants,  shrubs  and  trees ;  rice,  broom-corn  and 
bark ;  flax,  hemp  and  tow;  tobacco,  unmanu- 
factured. 

In  this  list  a  few  are  included  which  may,  per- 
haps, not  be  fairly  classed  as  raw  products.  For 
instance,  flour,  smoked  and  salted  meats,  dried 
fruits ;  timber  and  lumber,  round,  hewn  and  sawed. 
But  these  form  a  small  number  compared  with  the 
total  number  provided  for  by  the  treaty. 


88  The  Reciprocity  Treatif  of  1854.  [454 

The  trade  for  the  ten  years,  1853-1863,  may  be 
summarized  as  follows  :  ^ 

Products  of  the  Mine  (imported  into  United 
States). — 

1853 1  58,400 

1856 84,228 

1860 318,537 

1863 1,114,831 

Products  of  the  Forest. — 

1853 \ 2,589,898 

1856 3,345,284 

1860 4,019,278 

1863 3,679,559 

Products  of  the  Sea. — 

1853 73,422 

1856 140,948 

1860 185,873 

1863 957,166 

Animal  Products. — 

1853 1,107,870 

1856 2,375,388 

1860 3,557,912 

1863 3,133,463 

Agricultural  Products. — 

1853 4,949,576 

1856 1 1,864,836 

1860 10,013,799 

1863 7,005.826 

The  largest  imports  before  the  treaty  were  of 
agricultural  produce,  and  in  1863  they  remained 
still  the  largest,  having  also  made  the  largest  gain — 
about  three  millions — during  the  decade.  The 
second  place,  both  in  1853  and  in  1863,  belonged  to 
the  products  of  the  forest,  the  gain,  however,  being 
inferior  to  that  made  by  animal  products.     Animal 

*For  detailed  statistics  see  Appendix,  pp.  63-64. 


455]    .  The  Mecijjrocihf  Treat t/  of  185 i.  '  39 

products  occupied  the  third  place  at  the  beginning 
and  the  ending  of  the  period,  while  the  gain  was 
superior  to  that  made  by  the  products  of  the  forest. 
The  fourth  and  fifth  places  were  held  by  fish  pro- 
ducts and  the  products  of  the  mine,  the  latter  dis- 
placing the  former  between  1853  and  1863. 

Turning   now   to   the   imports    from    the    United 
States  into  Canada,  we  have  the  following  figures : 

Products  of  the  Mine  (imported  into  Canada).— 

.1853 $  126,586 

1856 488,984 

I860 406,688 

1863 647,965" 

Products  of  the  Forest. — 

1853 66,620 

1856..... 302,904 

I860 i;]7,392 

1863 134,281 

Products  of  the  Sea. — 

1853 383,436 

1856 411,716 

I860 227,112 

1863 281,023 

Animal  Products. — 

1853 570,587 

1856 2,896,838 

I860 1,679,912 

1863 3,050,294 

Agricultural  Products. — 

1853 668,113 

1856 3,809,112 

I860 4,603,114 

1863 3,137,447' 

As  is  the  case  of  the  United  States  imports,  the 
largest  item   in  the  Canadian  in  1853  was  that  of 
'For  detailed  statistics  see  Appendix,  pp.  63-64. 


1; 


40  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  [456 

agricultural  produce,  and  this  proportion  remained 
the  same  in  1863,  the  increase  being  remarkable — 
about  seven  and  a-half  millions.'  The  second 
place  was  held  by  animal  products,  both  at  the 
beginning  and  at  the  end  of  the  period,  the  gain 
also  being  next  in  amount  to  that  of  agricultural 
produce.  Products  of  the  sea  occupied  the  third 
place  at  the  beginning,  but  had  fallen  to  fourth  place 
at  the  end,  with  the  additional  disgrace  of  having 
had  a  decrease  instead  of  a  gain  during  the  ten 
years.  Products  of  the  mine  rose  from  fourth  place 
to  third  from  1853-1863,  making  a  gain  in  amount 
next  to  that  of  animal  products.  Finally  products  of 
the  forest  held  and  retained  the  fifth  place. 

The  following  figures  show  the  amount  of  the 
trade  in  a  few  leading  articles  i^ 

Animals  (imported  into  United  States.) — 

INCREASE. 

1862 $1,532,957 

1865 6,503,318  $3,970,361 

Barley. — 

1862 1,095,443 

1865 4,093,202  2,997,759 

Timber. — 

1862 2,526,658 

1865 4,515,626  1,938,968 

Oats.— 

1862 634,176 

1865 2,216,722  1,582,546 

^ These  figures  are  liable  to  considerable  qualification,  being  at 
best  rough  estimates.    See  Appendix,  p.  63,  note. 

^The  figures  are  taken  from  the  reports  of  the  Minister  of  Finance 
of  Canada  and  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  of  the  United 
States.  Separate  tables  for  articles  included  in  the  treaty  are 
given  for  Canada,  1858-1863;  and  for  the  United  States,  .July  1, 1861, 
and  June  .SO,  1866. 


457]                 The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.         -           41 
Wool.— 

,„„„  IKCKIABK. 

1862 569,839 

1865 1,527,275                 967,436 

Meats. — 

1862 128,935 

1866 850,328                721,393 

Coal. — 

1862 614,556 

1866 1,210,004                595,448 

Grain,  all  kinds  (imported  into  Canada).— 

1858 2,078,464 

1863 5,062,610              3,984,146 

Meats. — 

1858 544,366 

1863 1,238,923                 694,557 

Coal. — 

1868 242,700 

1863 548,846                 306,146 

Animals. — 

1858 240,186 

1863 620,835                280,649 

Hides. — 

1858 125,000 

1863 384,951                 259,951 

Cheese. — 

1858 90,045 

1863 294,327                  204,282 

Wool.— 

1858 11,101 

1863 208,868                 197,757 

Flour. — 

1858 750,580 

1863 898,029                 147,449 


43  The  Reciprocitu  Treaty  of  1854.  [458 

These  figures  show  that  the  articles  of  first  import- 
ance on  the  side  of  the  United  States  were  those  of 
animal  products,  and  barley,  timber,  oats,  wool, 
meats  and  coal ;  on  the  side  of  Canada  grain  occu- 
pied the  first  place,  followed  by  meats,  coal,  animals, 
hides,  cheese,  wool  and  flour.  If  barley  and  oats 
were  combined  in  the  United  States  imports  as  they 
are  in  the  Canadian  under  the  single  head  of  grain, 
!     '  they  would  take  the   first   place,  and  grain  would 

then  be  the  largest  import  into  both  countries.  Of 
course  these  figures  are  not  for  the  same  years  and 
some  slight  allowance  must  be  made  for  the  varying 
conditions  of  the  two  periods.  The  period  1858-1863 
covers  only  a  part  of  the  war  period,  while  the  years 
1862-1865  are  wholly  included  in  that  period.  As 
was  said  at  the  beginning  of  the  discussion,  the 
course  of  trade  under  the  treaty  was  disturbed  by 
two  great  economic  events,  so  that  no  certain  in- 
ference may  be  drawn  from  the  actual  course  of 
trade.  Moreover,  the  whole  period  of  the  treaty 
was  almost  too  short  to  allow  sound  conclusions  to 
be  drawn  from  the  figures  representing  its  progress. 

The  trade  between  the  United  States  and  the  other 
.  British  provinces  from  1849-1863  can  be  summarized 

as  follows:  the  figures  are  taken  from  a  table  of  lead- 
ing exports  to  British  provinces  other  than  Canada 
from  1849-1863.' 

Wheat.— 

1849 332.765 

1853 208,956 

1856 268,959 

1860 90,049 

1863...  .^.  .^^. 110,333 

'See  Appendix,  p.  66. 


459]  2%e  Jiecijirocih/  Treaty  of  1854.  4;{ 

Wheat  Flour. — 

1849 1,518,922 

1853 784,498 

1856 3,120,787 

I860 3,044,243 

1863 4,420,748 

Indian  Corn. — 

1849 126,791 

1853 105,404 

1856 136.774 

I860 85,915 

1863 131,552 

Meal,  Corn  and  Rye. — 

1849 625,691 

1853 135,040 

1856 631,959 

I860 206,881 

1863 286,238 

The  most  noticeable  features  in  the&e  figures  are 
the  decline  in  the  amount  of  exports  in  wheat,  corn 
and  rye  meal,  and  the  large  increase  in  wheat  flour. 
The  population  of  the  maritime  provinces  was  small 
and  their  resources  were  undeveloped.  New  England 
had  not  yet  come  to  need  the  raw  materials  of  which 
the  provinces  possessed  an  abundance,  and  therefore 
the  resources  were  not  developed  during  the  continu- 
ance of  the  treaty.  These  reasons  probably  explain  to 
a  considerable  extent  the  failure  of  the  treaty  to 
produce  a  greater  effect  upon  the  trade.  The  remark- 
able increase  in  the    export  of   wheat-flour  from  a 

million  and  a-half  to  nearly  four  millions  and  a-half 

may  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  the  United  States 
imported  wheat  and  re-exported  it  in  the  form  of 
wheat-flour. 

The  following  figures  show  the  relative  amount  of 
trade  between  the  United   States  and  Canada,  and 


44  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  [460 

between   the    United    States  and  the  other   British 
provinces : 

United  States  Imports.' 

Canada.  Other  Provinces. 

1850 4,285,470  1,358,992 

1853 5,278,116  2,272,602 

1866 17,488,197  3,822,224 

1860 18,861,073  4,989,708 

1862 15,253,162  4,046,843 


United  States  Exports. 


Canada.  Other  Provinces, 

1850 5,930,821  3,618,214 

1853 7,829,099  5,311,543 

1856 20,883,241  8,146,108 

1860 14,083,114  8,023,214 

1862 12,842,504  8,236,611 

The  proportion  of  trade  with  these  two  groups,  the 
Canadas  and  the  maritime  provinces,  Nova  Scotia, 
New  Brunswick,  Prince  Edward  Island  and  New- 
foundland, seems  to  have  been  little  affected  by  the 
treaty.  The  imports  from  Canada  were  three  times 
as  large  as  those  from  the  maritime  provinces  in  1850 
and  in  1862.  The  exports,  too,  bore  abo  .t  the  same 
proportion  to  each  other  in  both  years,  those  to 
Canada  being  somewhat  less  than  twice  as  large  as 
those  to  the  maritime  provinces.  The  effect  of  the 
treaty  appears  much  more  striking  in  the  Canada 
trade  than  in  that  to  the  maritime  provinces.  From 
1853-1856  the  imports  from  Canada  were  more  than 
trebled,  while  those  from  the  maritime  provinces  do 
not  double.  The  exports  to  Canada  during  the  same 
period  nearly  treble,  while  those  to  the  other  pro- 

^Statistics  of   comparative   amounts  of   exports    1849-1863;   of 
imports  1850-1863,  Appendix  p.  65. 


461]  The  Jiecyrrociti/   Treahj  of  185-4.  4ft 

vinces  again  do  not  double.     The  total  trade  between 

the  United  States  and  Canada  was  in — 

1853 13,107,215 

185(1 ;J8, 371,438 

The  total  trade  between  the  United  States  and  the 
maritime  provinces  was  in — 

1853 7,684,145 

1856 11,968,332 

During  the  discussion  over  the  abrogation  of  the 
treaty  the  common  assertion  was  that  the  United 
States  allowed  the  principal  Canadian  exports  to 
enter  free  of  duty,  while  Canada,  on  the  other  hand, 
imposed  a  duty  upon  exports  of  manufactured  goods 
of  the  United  States.  The  following  figures  show 
the  amounts  of  free  and  dutiable  goods  imported  into 
the  United  States  and  Canada  in  several  different 
3^ears  from  1850 -18(52: 

United  States  Imports.' 

Free.  Dutiable. 

1850 787,599  4,856,863 

1853 1.418,250  6,132,468 

1856 20,488,697  821,724 

I860 23,180,971  690,411 

1862 18,770,737  529,258 

Canadian  Imports. 

S'ree.  Dutiable. 

1850 791,128  5,803,732 

1863 1,125,566  10.656,582 

1856 9,933,586  12,770,923 

I860 8,746,799  8,626,230 

1862 19,044,374  6,128,783 

Of  the  United  States  imports  the  amount  of  free 
importation    increased    from    $787,599    in   1850    to 

'Comparative  amount  of   free  and  dutiable   goods,   1850-1867, 
Appendix,  p.  64. 


46  The  Reciprocily  Treaty  of  1854.  [402 

$28,180,971  in  18fi0,  while  that  of  dutiable  goods 
decreased  from  >J^«,  132,468  in  1853  to  )S^r)29,2r)8  in 
1802.  Of  Canadian  imports  the  free  importations 
increased  from  !t<7i)l,128  in  1850  to  $19,044,374  in 
1802,  while  the  dutiable  goods  remained  about  the 
same,  amounting  to  1^5,803,732  in  1850  and  to  )^(),128,- 
783  in  1802.  An  actual  increase  in  tlie  amount  of 
dutiable  goodw  occurred  from  1853-1850.  The  figures 
for  these  years  were  as  follows: 

1853 10,6o<i,582 

1854 13,449,341 

1855 11,449,472 

185G 12,770,023 

The  amounts  gradually  declined,  until  in  1802  it 
reached  the  lowest  amount  of  the  twelve  years, 
1851-18G2  inclusive.  This  large  amount  of  dutiable 
goods  may  have  been  the  result  of  the  better  trade 
relations  established  between  the  two  countries  by 
the  treaty,  although  the  largest  amount  of  dutiable 
imports  during  the  period  1850-02  was  in  1854,  the 
year  before  the  treaty  went  into  operation.  The 
amount  of  dutiable  goods  imported  into  the  United 
States,  therefore,  declined  from  about  $5,000,000  in 
1850  until  it  reached  the  small  amount  of  $529,000  in 
1802 — not  only  a  smaller  amount  absolutely,  but,  of 
course,  a  much  smaller  amount  in  proportion  to  the 
increased  amount  of  trade.  The  amount  of  dutiable 
goods  imported  into  Canada,  on  the  other  hand, 
increased  absolutely,  although  the  amount  bore  a 
smaller  proportion  to  the  total  trade.  The  increase 
in  free  goods  was  about  the  same  in  both  countries, 
except  for  the  years,  1856  and  1860,  when  the 
increase  of  United  States  imports  was  much  greater 
than  that  of  Canadian  imports. 


4G;JJ  The  Jiecij)rodiij  Treu/i/  of  I8.'i4.  47 

The  treaty  of  1854  applied  almost  exclusively  to 
natural  products,  leaving  manufactures  upon  the 
same  foundations  upon  which  they  had  rested  before 
the  treaty.  Curiously  enough,  however,  the  (lues- 
tion  of  manufactures  i)layed  an  important  part  in  the 
abrogation  of  the  treaty.  The  one  really  serious  com- 
plaint made  '^  the  opponents  of  the  treaty  against 
it,  and  admitted  even  by  its  friends,  was  the  viola- 
tion of  the  spirit  of  the  treaty  by  the  province  of 
Canada  by  the  increase  of  the  provincial  tariff  on 
articles  not  included  in  the  treaty. 

The  importance  of  this  action  of  Canada  will  be 
understood  when  it  is  remembered  that  the  population 
of  Canada  formed  the  largest  portion  of  the  popula- 
tion of  the  provinces,  being  2,600,000  out  of  a  total  of 
8,258,000.  The  Canadian  trade,  therefore,  formed 
by  far  the  largest  part  of  the  trade  of  the  British  prov- 
inces, that  of  the  remainder,  containing  only  about 
700,000  inhabitants,  being  relatively  unimportant. 
With  these  other  provinces  there  was  no  dissatisfac- 
tion during  the  existence  of  the  treaty.  Trade  with 
them  was  a  local  matter  of  interest  only  to  the  people 
of  New  England.  Their  slow  development  had  not 
in  1860  made  clear  the  importance  of  their  natural 
resources.  Hence  the  arguments  for  a  closer  union 
with  the  maritime  provinces,  so  prevalent  to-day,  had 
not  yet  made  their  appearance. 

The  increase  of  the  Canadian  tariff  was  a  part  of 
the  same  policy  which  had  dictated  the  negotiation 
of  the  reciprocity  treaty,  a  policy  having  for  its 
object  the  development  of  the  resources  of  the  prov- 
inces. To  carry  out  this  policy  the  Canadian  govern- 
ment embarked  on  a  system  of  internal  improvements 
destined  to  develop  their  resources.  Canals  were  built 


48 


The  lieciprocitii  Treati/  of  1854. 


[464 


and  improved,  the  navigation  of  the  St.  Lawrence 
was  improved,  and  railroads  were  constructed.  The 
idea  of  the  government  seems  to  have  been  to  direct 
the  carrying  trade  of  the  new  western  states  of  the 
Union  from  the  railroads  and  ca'^ials  of  New  York 
to  Canadian  canals  and  railroads.  The  negotiation 
of  the  reciprocity  treaty  gave  a  favorable  opportunity 
for  such  a  scheme. 

These  improvements  in  transportation  we^"e  under- 
taken bj-  the  government  and  were  mainly  dependent 
upon  subsidies  and  municipal  bonds.  No  doubt  the 
object  of  these  works  was  as  much  political  as  com- 
mercial, the  desire  of  the  Canadian  statesmen  having 
been  to  consolidate  the  separate  provinces  and  by  an 
increase  in  the  material  wealth  of  the  people  to 
remove  all  discontent,  which  from  the  situation  of 
the  country,  so  easily  developed  into  a  desire  for 
annexation  to  the  United  States. 

Whatever  the  objects  of  the  Canadian  government, 
such  works  required  large  revenues  for  their  com- 
pletion.' Some  increase  of  taxation  became  neces- 
sary. The  easier  method  seemed  to  be  to  raise  the 
tariff.  This  could  not  bo  done  in  the  case  of  those 
articles  included  in  the  treaty,  but  could  be  done  in 
the  case  of  manufactured  goods.  This  was  done,  and 
then  arose  the  grievance  of  which  the  Americans 
so  bitterlj'  complained.  From  year  to  year,  as  a 
greater  revenue  was  required,  a  higher  tariff  was 
imposed  to  the  increasing  disgust  of  the  American 
manufacturer. 


'  "Canada  and  the  States."  Sir  E.  W.  Watkin,  p.  396. 


465]  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.         -  49 

The   yearly   changes   from    1855-1859   in   certain 

articles  were  as  follows: 

1855.  1856.  1857.  1858.  1859. 

Molasses 16%  11  11  18  30 

Sugar  (refined)....  32  J8  25  26>^  40 

Sugar  (other) 27>^  20  llyi  21  30 

Boots  and  Shoes...  12>^  Uyi  20  21  25 

Harness 12;^  17  20  21  25 

Cotton  Goods 12j^  13>^  15  16  20 

Iron  Goods 12^  18>^  16  16  20 

Silk  Goods 12>^  IZyi  16  17  20 

Wool  Good 12K  14  15  18  20> 

The  complaint  of  the  Americans  might  have  had  a 
doubtful  justification  before  the  outbreak  of  the  civil 
war,  while  the  tariff  of  1857  was  in  force.  It  could 
have  none  at  all  after  the  war  tariffs  came  into  exist- 
ence. Even  under  the  tariff  of  1857,  the  tariff  rate 
of  the  United  States  upon  cotton  and  woolen  goods 
was  24  per  cent.,  4  per  cent,  higher  than  the  Canadian 
duty  under  the  tariff  of  1859.  But  the  justification 
of  the  complaint  does  not  rest  with  the  comparative 
rate  of  duties.  No  formal  complaint  of  a  violation 
of  the  treaty  was  made  by  either  party.  The  United 
States  claimed  that  the  treaty  was  made  with  the 
understanding  that  the  tariff  of  Canada  would 
remain  the  same  as  it  had  been  at  the  conclusion  of 
the  treaty.  But  no  clause  to  such  an  effect  had 
been  added  to  the  treaty,  and  the  United  States 
could  expect  only  a  strict  adhesion  to  the  terms  of 
the  treaty. 

1  "House  Executive  Documents,"  1859-18(i0,  Vol.  13,  No.  96,  p. 
10.     Report  of  Israel  T.  Hatch  on  reciprocity  treaty,  March  28, 1860. 


// 


50  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  [466 

The  following  figures  show  the  effect  of  the  higher 
Canadian  tariff   upon  the  exports  of   ma,nufactures 
from  the  United  States:' 
Cotton  Manufactures. — 

1858-59 $363,016 

1862-63 64,495 

Iron  Manufactures,  {except  Pig  Iron). 

1858-59 761,619 

1862-G3 395,907 

Boots  and  Shoes. — 

1858-59 211,147 

1862-63 22,860 

Tobacco  {Manufactured). — 

1858-59 1,205,084 

1862-63 76,026 

House  Furniture. — 

1858-59 136,765 

1862-63 66,718 

Books. — 

» 

1858-59 154,034 

1862-63 25,164 

Hats. — 

1858-59 116,150 

1862-63 14,078 

Musical  Instruments. — 

1858-59 104,534 

1862-63 67.445 

Unenumerated. — 

1858-59 ' 624,534 

1862-63 401,227 

These  figures  show  a  marked  decrease  in  the 
exports  of  American  manufactures  to  Canada  from 
1858  to  1863.     Undoubtedly  the  increase  in  the  rate 

'For  detailed  statistics  see  Appendix,  p.  66. 


467]  The  Reciprocittj  Treaty  0/  1854.  51 

of  the  Canadian  duties  upon  manufactured  articles, 
was  one  of  the  causes  of  this  falling  off.  Yet  it  must 
be  remembered  that  the  civil  war  broke  out  during 
the  period,  and  that  the  effect  which  it  produced 
upon  the  export  of  manufactures  must  have  been 
considerable,  especially  in  the  case  of  the  cotton 
manufactures.  The  needs  of  the  United  States 
increased,  while  its  power  of  production  diminished. 
This,  of  course,  applied  to  all  branches  of  production. 
The  following  figures  show  the  total  amounts  of 
the  exports  of  American  manufactures  to  Canada 
for  the  several  years  from  1858-1859  to  1862-18G3. 

1858-59 4,185,516 

1859-60 3,548,114 

1800-61 3.501 ,642 

1861-62 2,596,930 

1862-63 1,510,802 

The  privilege  of  free  navigation  of  the  river  St. 
Lawrence,  conferred  by  the  fourth  article  of  the 
treaty,  had  long  been  a  subject  of  negotiation 
between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain.  The 
United  States  claimed  a  right  of  free  navigation  as 
"a  riparian  state  of  the  upper  waters  of  the  river  and 
of  the  lakes  which  feed  it."^  This  privilege,  granted 
temporarily  in  1854,  was  given  permanently  by 
article  XXVI  of  the  treaty  of  1871. 

Besides  the  privilege  of  navigating  the  St.  Law- 
rence, that  of  navigating  those  canals  of  Canada 
whi'ih  formed  the  means  of  communication  between 
the  lakes  and  the  sea,  was  granted  by  the  fourth 
article  of  the  treaty.  This  privilege  proved  a  bone 
of  contention  between  the  two  countries. 

The  interest  of  the  United  States  in  the  navigation 
of  the  Canadian  canals  by  its  citizens  upon  the  same 

'Hall's  "International  Law,"  p.  118. 


Mil 


52  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  [468 

terms  with  Canadians  related  to  the  increasing  needs 
of  means  of  transportation  from  the  grain  producing 
states  of  the  northwest  to  the  sea-coast.  The  rail- 
road system  in  the  United  States  was  still  in  the 
early  stages  of  its  development,  the  great  through 
lines  between  the  interior  and  the  sea-coast  not 
being  completed  until  nearly  ten  years  after  the 
period  of  the  reciprocity  treaty.  Great  dependence 
was  still  made  upon  the  canal  system  of  the  country, 
and  many  attempts  were  made  for  the  improvement 
of  the  existing  system.  Doubtless,  too,  the  blockade 
of  the  Mississippi  during  the  civil  war,  thus  cutting 
off  one  means  of  transportation  to  the  sea,  made  the 
desire  for  any  other  possible  avenue  of  communica- 
tion with  the  sea  stronger  than  it  would  otherwise 
have  been. 

The  inadequacy  of  the  existing  means  of  trans- 
portation led,  too,  to  a  natural  suspicion  on  the  part 
of  the  producers  of  western  grain  that  the  owners  of 
railroads  and  canals  would  use  them  for  the  further- 
ance of  their  own  interests  to  the  injury  of  the 
helpless  producers.  Thus  early  appeared  the  west- 
ern hostility  to  railroads,  which  later  influenced  the 
legislation  of  many  states. 

Besides  the  western  producers,  anxious  for  a  new 
avenue  for  the  transportation  of  their  products  to 
market,  a  certain  commercial  element  favored  the 
continuance  of  free  navigation,  hoping  thereby  to 
profit  by  means  of  the  larger  trade  which  would 
be  brought  to  their  doors.  This  element  seems  to 
have  been  most  active  in  the  northern  parts  of  New 
York,  especially  in  Rochester,  Oswego  and  Ogdens- 
burg.  Their  expectation  seems  to  have  been  to 
obtain  a  large  share  of  the  business  of  transportation 


••A 


469]  The  Reciprociiy  Treaty  of  1854.         "  53 

from  the  west  to  the  sea-coast.  The  course  would 
naturally  be,  they  thought,  from  the  lakes  through 
the  Welland  canal  and  Lake  Ontario  to  their  own 
T-'^harves.  Then  they  would  profit  greatly  by  such 
a  trade. 

But  the  interest  of  Canada  in  granting  the  privi- 
lege of  navigating  her  canals  to  foreigners  seems  to 
have  been  clearly  connected  with  the  policy  of  internal 
development  to  which  I  have  already  referred.  The 
canals  were  built  for  the  benefit  of  Canada,  and  the 
grant  of  special  privileges  to  Americans  was  expected 
to  work  towards  that  end.  The  diversion  of  a  large 
part  of  the  carrying  trade  from  American  canals  and 
railroads  would  be  a  great  gain  to  Canada  and  would 
surely  cause  such  an  increase  of  prosperity  that  all 
desire  for  annexation  would  die  out  of  the  minds  of 
the  people.  Unfortuately  the  laws  of  nature  were 
unfavorable  to  this  scheme.  For  a  good  portion  of 
each  year  the  canals  and  rivers  of  Canada  are  frozen 
over,  and  consequently  this  new  outlet  for  the 
surplus  products  of  the  west  could  have  only  a 
limited  value.  The  attempt  to  thwart  the  laws  of 
nature  did  not  turn  out  as  the  projectors  expected. 

In  the  report  of  Hon.  W.  P.  Howland,  finance 
minister  for  Canada  for  the  year  1862,'  the  results  of 
this  policy  are  examined.  He  says  that  ''the  move- 
ment of  property  on  the  provincial  canals  shows  a 
steady  increase." 

On  the  Welland  canal  the  movement  was: 

Tons  Property.  Tonnaqe  of  Vessels. 

1859 709,611  856,918 

1860 944,084  1,238,509 

1861 1,020.483  1,327,672 

1862 1,243,774  1,476,842 

1"  House  Executive  Documents"  1863-1864,  Vol.9,  No.  32,  pp. 
37-40.    (Extract.) 


64  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  [.70 

On  the  St.  Lawrence  canals  the  movement  was: 

1859 631,709  765,636 

1860 733,596  824,465 

1861 886,908  1,009,469 

1862 964,394  1,049,230 

In  1860  the  tolls  on  the  St.  Lawrence  canals  were 
abolished  and  those  on  the  Welland  canal  reduced. 

The  report  of  the  finance  minister  says  upon  this 
point,  that  though  there  has  been  an  increase  in 
the  movement  of  property  by  the  St.  Lawrence  route 
since  the  change,  this  increase  must  not  be  con- 
sidered as  due  entirely  to  the  remission  of  tolls. 
"The  greatly  increased  production  of  cereals  in  the 
western  states  and  the  figures'  presently  introduced 
will  show  that  in  proportion  to  that  increase,  and  to 
the  whole  volume  of  agricultural  produce  moved 
from  Lakes  Erie  and  Michigan  to  tide-water,  we  have 
not  obtained  so  large  a  traffic  since  the  removal 
of  the  tolls  as  we  obtained  prior  to  the  adoption  of 
that  policy." 

'Movement  of  American  Breadstuffe. 

Year.        Down  the  St.  Laicrence.  2'hrough  Erie  Canal. 

1856 1,209,612  bus.  15,342,833  bus. 

1857 1,930,280  "  10,601,532     " 

1858 1,876,933  "  13,757,283     " 

1859 1,988,759  "  10,371,966     " 

1860 1,846,462  "  23,912,000     " 

1861 3,103,155  "  34,427,800     " 

1862 5,320  054  "  39,240,131     " 

From  this  table  it  appears  that  for  seven  years  the  transportation 
of  breadstuflfs  by  the  St.  Lawrence  route  was — 

1856 7.  3  per  cent.  1860 7.16  per  cent. 

1857 15.  4        "  1861....  8.26 

1858 12.01   "         1862. ...11. 04 

1859 16.08 

From  "House  Executive  Documents"  First  Session,  Thirty-eighth 
Congress,  Vol.  IX,  No.  32,  p.  38.  Extract  from  Finance  Minister's 
Report  for  Canada,  1862. 


471]  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  55 

While  the  Canadian  canals  failed  to  reap  the 
benefits  expected  from  the  reduction  of  tolls,  the  Erie 
canal  materially  increased  its  tolls.  This  increase 
amounted  to  an  advance  of  seventy  cents  per  ton  on 
wheat  and  flour  from  Buffalo  to  tide  water,  and  of 
forty  cents  per  ton  from  Oswego  to  tide- water. 

The  finance  minister  concludes  from  the  results 
of  the  free  canal  system  that  the  policy  has  been 
productive  of  benefit,  neither  to  the  producer  nor  to 
the  consumer  of  western  breadstuffs.  He  says  that 
"it  can  be  shown  from  trustworthy  data  that,  in  so 
far  as  the  actual  cost  of  transportation  is  concerned, 
western  produce  can  be  carried  to  tide-water  much 
cheaper  by  the  St.  Lawrence  than  by  any  competing 
route."  The  cause  of  the  failure  of  Canadian  canals 
to  obtain  a  large  proportion  of  the  western  trade  is 
due,  in  the  opinion  of  the  minister,  to  "the  absence 
of  sufficient  competition  among  forwarders  engaged 
in  the  St.  Lawrence  trade,  to  the  financial  relations 
between  shippers  engaged  in  the  western  trade  and 
the  capitalists  of  New  York,  and  finally  and  chiefly, 
to  the  lower  rates  of  freights  from  New  York  to 
Europe,  occasioned  by  the  greater  competition  at 
that  port  than  is  to  be  found  at  Quebec  or  Montreal." 
"  There  is  but  one  course  open  for  securing  that 
quota  of  the  western  trade  which  the  advantages  of 
the  St.  Lawrence  route  give  us  reason  to  anticipate. 
If  we  can  give  to  the  owners  of  the  largest  vessels 
now  profitably  engaged  in  the  trade  of  Lake  Michigan 
the  option  of  trading  to  Kingston  and  the  St.  Law- 
rence, or  to  Buffalo,  as  may  be  fomid  most  profitable, 
we  shall  have  thrown  down  the  barrier  which  now 
forces  the  main  current  of  trade  into  the  Erie  canal. 
We  shall  have  more  than  balanced  the  greater  insur- 


/■('■ 


ftQ  The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854.  [472 

ance  and  freights  charged  from  our  seaports  to 
Europe  over  the  corresponding  charges  from  New 
York,  and  we  may  thereafter  expect  Quebec  and 
Montreal  to  take  rank  among  the  greatest  grain 
marts  of  this  continent." 

The  value  of  the  navigation  of  the  Canadian 
canals  can,  I  think,  be  safely  inferred  from  this 
report  of  the  Canadian  minister  of  finance.  Not- 
withstanding the  importance  attached  to  it  by  the 
inhabitants  of  the  northwest,  the  results  of  its  prac- 
tical use  for  a  series  of  years  were  unsatisfactory  if 
not  insignificant.  In  spite  of  every  effort  to  direct 
the  carrying  trade  from  the  Erie  canal  the  Canadian 
canals  obtained  only  a  small  fraction  of  the  total 
trade,  and  this  small  fraction  seemed  to  bear  a 
smaller  and  smaller  proportion  to  the  total  traffic 
between  the  west  and  the  sea-coast. 

An  examination  of  the  history  and  effect  of  the 
reciprocity  treaty  of  1854  leads  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  measure  was  favorable  to  the  development  of 
trade  between  the  United  States  and  the  British 
provinces.  The  statistics  of  trade  indicate  a  greater 
increase  of  commerce  during  the  continuance  of  the 
treaty  than  at  any  other  time  during  the  period  from 
1820-1880.  This  increase  appears  most  clearly 
during  the  earlj"^  years  of  the  treaty,  for  the  later 
years  were  disturbed  by  extraordinary  economic 
events.  But  dependence  must  not  be  had  exclusively 
upon  statistics,  for  there  were  features  of  the  trade 
which  cannot  be  illustrated  by  means  of  statistics. 
The  "commerce  of  convenience"  and  the  gain  to 
both  countries,  and  especially  to  the  United  States, 
of  obtaining  raw  materials  free  of  duty  are  subjects 
incapable  of   statistical  illustration.     Imperfections 


473] 


The  Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854. 


67 


there  may  have  been,  and  certainly  were,  as  was 
most  natural  in  a  first  attempt  at  the  settlement  of 
trade  relations  on  a  new  basis.  These  imperfections, 
however,  were  not  the  cause  of  its  abrogation.  The 
cause  was  political  rather  than  economical  or  com- 
mercial. There  is  very  little  doubt,  as  has  been  said 
already,  that  the  attitude  of  the  English  towards  the 
North  during  the  civil  war,  was  the  direct  cause  of 
the  abrogation  of  the  treaty.  The  evident  hostility 
of  the  English  aroused  still  more  fully  all  the  dormant 
resentment  of  the  North,  stirred  as  it  was  already 
by  the  southern  rebellion.  In  such  a  state  of  feeling 
the  result  of  any  discussion  of  the  treaty  must  prove 
fatal.  And  so  it  did.  The  controversy  in  regard  to 
renewal  began  just  as  the  hostility  to  England  was 
strongest.  The  arguments  of  the  friends  of  reci- 
procity were  of  no  avail.  The  opponents  of  the 
measure  appealed  to  the  patriotism  of  the  people, 
and  to  their  self-interest  as  well.  They  showed  the 
great  loss  of  revenue  caused  by  the  existence  of  the 
treaty;  they  made  it  clear  that  the  British  colonists 
were  profiting  from  the  needs  of  the  Americans;  and 
they  clinched  the  argument  by  reminding  the  people 
of  the  hostility  of  those  very  people  who  were  grow- 
ing rich  from  their  necessities.  The  majority  are 
moved  more  by  their  feelings  than  by  their  judg- 
ment. The  business  sentiment  of  the  country 
favored  a  continuance  of  the  policj'  of  reciprocity, 
but  it  was  overruled  by  the  burst  of  patriotic  feeling 
aroused  throughout  the  nation. 

The  unfortunate  fate  of  the  reciprocity  treaty  has 
given  it  a  false  position  in  the  economic  history  of 
the  country.  As  the  first  measure  of  its  kind  in  the 
trade  relations  of  the  United  States  and  Canada  and 


7  / 


88  The  ReciprocUif   Trenfi/  of  1854.  [474 

with  no  successor  as  yet,  it  seems  an  isolated  thing, 
unrelated  to  the  preceding  or  succeci.  g  periods. 
But  this  was  not  really  the  case.  The  years  from 
1846-1870  witnessed  the  development  of  a  policy  on 
the  part  of  the  principal  nations  of  the  world  in  favor 
of  the  removal  of  many  of  the  existing  restrictions 
upon  international  trade.  This  policy  was  shown  hy 
the  repeal  of  the  corn  laws  in  England,  by  the 
develpment  of  the  zoUverein  in  Germany,  by  the 
negotiation  of  numerous  commercial  treaties  and  by 
the  reduction  of  import  duties  in  various  countries. 
In  the  United  States  the  tendency  found  expression 
in  the  negotiation  of  the  reciprocity  treaty  and  in 
the  reduced  tariffs  of  1846  and  1857.  But  this 
movement,  unfortunately,  was  interrupted  by  the 
outbreak  of  the  civil  war  in  the  United  States  and 
by  the  Franco-Prussian  war  in  Europe.  The  conse- 
quence of  these  two  events  was  the  overthrow  of  the 
liberal  movement  in  Europe  and  America.  The 
United  States  needed  greater  revenues  for  the 
conduct  of  the  war  and  for  the  payment  of  the  debt 
thus  incurred.  Europe  since  1870  has  been  an  armed 
camp,  and  enormous  revenues  are  needed  to  keep 
jj  in  constant  readiness  the  millions  of  soldiers,  the 

large  navies  and  the  costly  defences  required  in  such 
a  state  of  affairs.  With  the  downfall  of  the  liberal 
movement  disappeared  the  best  1  pes  of  better  trade 
•  relations  between  the  United  States  and  the  British 
provinces. 


APPENDIX. 


1820-1850. 

Trade  Between  the  United  States  and  the  British 

Provinces. 

Imports  United  States  from    Exports  United  States  to 
Year.  British  North  America.         British  North  America. 

1821 $490,704  $2,009,791 

1822 526,817  1,897,559 

1823 463,374  1,821,460 

1824 705,931  1,775,724 

1825 610,788  2,539,964 

1826 650,316  2,588,549 

1827 445,118  2,830,674 

1828 447.659  1,674,674 

1829 577,542  2,764,909 

1830 650,303  3,786,373 

1831 864,9C9  4,061,838 

1832 1,229,526  3,614,385 

1833 1,793,393  4,471,084 

1834 1 ,548,733  3,535,276 

1835 1,435,168  4,047,888 

1836 2,427,571  2,651,206 

1837 2,359,263  3,28«,9(i6 

1838 1,555.570  2,723,491 

1839 '.',155,146  3,563,454 

1840 2,007,767  6,100,001 

1841 1,968,187  6,656,563 

1842 1,762,001  6,190,309 

1843 857,696  2,724.422 

1844 1,465,715  6,715,903 

1845 2,020,065  6,054,226 

1846 1,937,717  7,406,433 

1847 2,343,937  7,985.543 

1848 3,646,467  8,382,655 

1849 2,826,880  8,104,267 


» t 


60 


Appendix. 


[476 


The  preceding  table  is  taken  from  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  commerce  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, which  was  drawn  up  by  Elijah  Ward 
and  was  presented  in  April,  1864.  It  is  in  the 
''Reports  of  Committees,"  First  Session,  Thirty- 
eighth  Congress,  1863-1804,  Vol.  I,  No.  'M,  p.  1-2. 


1850-1885. 

Trade  Between  the  United  States  and  the  British 

Provinces. 

ImporU  United  States  from       British  North  Attierica 

Year.              British  North  America.  from  United  States. 

186C 5,179,500  11,608,641 

1851 5,279,718  14,263,751 

1852 5,409,445  '         13,993,570 

1853 6,527,559  19,445,478 

1854 8,784,412  26,115,132 

1855 15,118,289  34,362,188 

1856 21,276,614  35,764,980 

1857 22,108,916  27,788,238 

1858 15,784,836  22,210,837 

1859 19,287,565  26,761,618 

1860  23,572,796  25,871,399 

1861 22,724,489  28,520,735 

1862 18,515,686  30,37;?,212 

1863 17,191,217  29,680,955 

1864 29,608,736  7,952,401 

1865 33.264,403  27,269,158 

186R 48,528,628  27,905,984 

1867 25,044,005  25,239,459 

1868 26,261,378  22,644,235 

1869 29, 293, 766  21 ,680,062 

1870 36,265,328  21,869,447 

1871 32,542,137  27,185,686 

1872 36,346,930  33,741,995 

1873 37,175,244  ,        45,193,042 

1874 34,173,586  51,785,154 

1875 27,866,615  48,641,477 

1876  28,805,964  43,873,789 

1877 24,164,755  51,568,164 


477] 


Appendix, 


61 


Imixyrti  United  Statenfrun  nrilUh  Nitrth  Americn 

Year.             BritUth  Niirth  America  from  Uniteil  Statea. 

1878 25,044,811  49,186,384 

1879 26,719,771  43,957.284 

1880 32,988,564  40,610,949 

1881 37,684,101  49,346,371 

1882 60,776,581  53,201,161 

1883 44,294,168  62,855,790 

1884 38,399,835  57,740,714 

1885 36,696,686  61,618,:535 

These  figures  are  from  the  ''Quarterly  Reports  of 
the  Bureau  of  Statistics,"  1885-188G,  p.  .'J71.  The 
data  for  the  United  States  are  for  fiscal  year  ending 
June  80.  Those  for  the  British  provinces,  1850- 
1868,  are  for  the  calendar  year.  Those  for  1864  for 
the  British  provinces  are  for  six  months  ending 
June  30,  1864. 


Exports  to  Canada  and  the  Provinces. 

Year.                     Dome»tie.  Foreign. 

1821 2.009,336  465 

1822 1,881,273  16,286 

1823 1,818,113  3,347 

1824 1,773,107  2,617 

1825 2,538,224  1,740 

1826 2,664,165  24,384 

1827 2,797,014  33,660 

1828 1,618,288  56,386 

1829 3,724,104  40,805 

1830 3,650,031  136,342 

1831 4,026,392  35,446 

1832 3,569,302  45,083 

1833 4,390,081  81,003 

1834 3,477,709  57,567 

1835 3,900,545  14-,343 

1836 2,456,416  194,861 

1837 2,992,474  296,512 

1838 2,484,987  238,504 

1839 3,418,770  144,684 

1840 6,895,966  204,035 


//■' 


62 


Appendix. 


[478 


I'i 


Year.                   Domestic.  Foreign. 

1841 0,292,290  364,273 

1842 5,950,143  240,166 

1843 2,617,005  107,417 

1844-  •  •  • b, 361, 186  1,354,717 

1845 4,844,966  1,209,260 

1846 6,012,666  1,363,767 

1847 5,819,667  2,165,876 

1848 6,399,959  1,982.696 

1849 5,932,106  2,172,lftl 

1850 7,758,291  1,790,744 

1851 9,060,387  2,954,536 

1852 6,655,097  3,853,919 

1853 7,404,087  5,736,555 

1854 15,204,144  9,362,716 

1855 15,806,642  11 ,999,378 

1856 22,714,697  6,314,652 

1857 19,936,113  4,326,369 

1858 19,838,959  4,012,76*' 

1859 18,029,254  6,622,4VL 

1860 18,667,429  4,038,899 

1861 18,883,715  3,861,098 

1862 18,652,012  2,427,103 

1863  28,629,110  2.651,920 

"House  Executive  Documents,"  1863-1864,  Vol.9,  No.  32,  p.  6. 
Years  end  September  30,  1821-1842,  and  June  30,  1843-1863. 


Statement  Exhibiting  in  Contrast  the  Valuk  or  Kach  Class  of 

Imports,  into  the  United  States  and  the  Province 

OF  Canada,  from  the  Other,  Under 

the  Treaty. 


1850. 

1851. 

A852. 

Into  n.  S. 

Into  Gmdt. 

InUU.  8.  1  Into  Canada. 

Into  U.  S.    .'nto  Canada, 

Products  of  the  Mine- 
Products  of  the  Forest 
Products  of  the  Sea.. . 
Animals  and  Products 
AgriculturalProducts 

41,587 

45,505 

21473 

455.036 

437,084 

17,623'  62,516 
1,279,929'        18,620 

43,784         26,494 

564,787       962,176 

1,937.393       876,327 

192        64,857 

1,838,775        116,159 

50,289         31,079 

966,189       4,54,475 

3.277,929       473,137 

1,530,488 

30,943 

490,477 

2,706,362 

4,767,270 

Total 

990,685 

3,843,416     l,748,13;i 

6.1113,374     1,139,707 

Pro 
Pro 
Pro 
Ani 

Agi 


479] 


Appendix. 


63 


1853. 

1854. 

IKV). 

Into  n,  S. 

Into  Canada. 

Into  D.  S, 

Into  Canada. 

256,182 

107,469 

74,851 

845,581 

1,500,531 

2,784,604 

IitoU.S. 

33,303 

3,016,880 

148,550 

1.486,936 

11,801,485 

Into  Canada. 

Products  of  the  Mine. 
Products  of  the  Forest 
Products  of  the  Sea.  • 
Animals  and  Products 
AgriculturalProducts 

58,400 
2,589,898 

75,423 
1,107,870 
4,949,570 

126,586 
66,620 
383,436 
570,587 
668,113 

118,628 

2,131,725 

85,472 

684,439 
5,295,667 

4J5,739 

186,830 

261,863 

1,878,664 

4,972.475 

Total 

8,779,166 

1,815,342 

8.305,831 

16,476,(  93 

7,725,561 

1856. 

1857. 

1868, 

Into  U.  S. 

Into  Canada. 

Into  U,  S. 

Into  n.  S, 

Into  Canada. 

Products  of  the  Mine. 
Products  of  the  Forest 
Products  of  the  Sea  . . 
Animals  and  Products 
AifriculturalProducts 

84,228 

3,345,284 

140,948 

2,375,388 

11,864,636 

488,984 

3A904 

411,716 

2,886,838 

3,80!),113 

189,894 
3,393,068 

154,417 
1,974,516 
7,100,413 

509,494 

411,820 

314,226 

2,134,339 

5,272,151 

93,405 

3,290,>3 

158,485 

2,231,786 

5,749,305 

324,374 

332,177 

157,674 

1,464,873 

3,385,51V 

Total 

17,810,684 

7,909,564 

12,812,308 

8,642,030 

11,514,364 

5  564.616 

1859. 

1860. 

1862.               1               1863. 

Into  n.  S. 

Into  Ganu*. 

Into  0.  8. 

Into  Canada. 

Into  n.  S. 

Into  Canada. 

Into  U.  S. 

Into  Canada. 

Products  of  the  Mine. 
Products  of  the  Forest 
Products  of  the  Sea. . . 
Animals  and  Products 
AgriculturalProducts 

227,911 
3,524,850 

201,583 
3,391,772 
0,278,351 

328,139 

132,113 

183,575 

1,758,428 

4,671,883 

318,537 

4,019,378 

185,873 

3,557,912 

10,013,799 

406,688 

137,392 

227,112 

1,679,912 

4,603,114 

1,073,565 
2,980,477 
1,087,013 
3,134,303 
8,860,003 

510,081 

181,519 

208,'>45 

2,658,217 

17,717,84(1 

1,114,831 
3,679,559 
957, 1(H! 
3,183,46:! 
7,005,82t) 

647,06 

134,281 

281,033 

3,050,294 

8,137,447 

Total 

13,624,467 

7,104,137 

18,095,399 

7,054,218 

17,116,360 

14,336  708 

15,890,845 

12,251,010 

The  statistics  for  the  years  186(>-1860  are  from  the  Reports  of 
Committees  (House),  Vol.  3,  No.  22,  p.  36. 

Those  for  1862-1863  are  my  own,  calculated  from  the  returns  of 
the  Minister  of  Finance  of  Canada  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury of  the  United  States  given  in  their  reports,  p.  40,  note. 


r(»> 


64  Appendix. 

Imports  into  Canada  from  United  States. 


[480 


"House  Executive  Document,"  1863-64,  Vol.  9,  No.  32,  p.  8. 
Calendar  year. 

"Report  of  A.  T.  Gait,  Minister  of  Finance,"  March,  1862,  p. 
19,  except  for  1862. 

Total  Import  from  Canada  and  Provinces. 


1850. 
1851. 
1853. 
1853. 
1854., 
1855.. 
1856.. 
1857.. 
1858.. 
1859.. 
I860.. 
1861.. 
1862.. 
1863.. 


Pr«e  by  Ordi- 
nary Laws, 


787,599 

l,690,a52 

980,389 

1,418,350 

639,143 

906,786 

1,081,611 

1,016,343 

563,532 

3,609,430 

3,734,385 

2,494,997 

1,618,185 


Fret  by 
Treaty, 


Total  Frte,    i  Paying  Daty, 


7,197,337 
19,407,086 
30,380,210 
14,752,355 
16,384.416 
30,416,586 
20,047,525 
17,153,552 
15,760,343 


Total  Imports, 


787,599 

4,856,863 

5,644,463 

1,690,052 

5,003,070 

6,693,122 

980,289 

5,130,010 

6,110,299 

1,418,250 

6,132,468 

7,550,718 

639,143 

8.388,417 

8,927,560 

8,104,133 

7,032,611 

15,136,734 

20,488,697 

821,724 

21,310,421 

31,396,553 

827,744 

22,134,396 

15,314,787 

491,738 

15,806,519 

18,983.836 

733,715 

19,737,551 

23.180,971 

690,411 

33,851,381 

23,.543,5S3 

520,411 

33,063,833 

18,770.737 

539,358 
872,383 

19,899,995 

"House  Executive  Documents,"  1863-64;  Vol. 
year  ending  June  30. 


9,  No.  32,  p.  7; 


^^^^                                   Appendix.  55 

Exports  from  United  States  to  Canada  and  Other 

Provinces. 

Exports  Untied  States  United  States 

Year.                    to  Canada.  to  Other  Provinces. 

1849 4.234,724  3,869,543 

18^0 5,930,821  3,618,214 

1851 7,929,140  4,085,783 

1852 6,717,060  3,791,956 

1853 7,829,099  5,311,543 

1854 17,300,706  7,266,154 

1855 18,720,344  9,085,676 

1856 20,883,241  8,146,108 

1757 16,574,895  7,637,687 

1858 17,029,254  6,622,473 

1859 18,910,792  9,213,832 

I860 14,083,114  ,          8,623,214 

1861 14,361,858  8,383,755 

1862 12,842,504  8,236,611 

1863 19,898,718  11,3S2,312 

From  "House  Executive  Documents,"  first  session  Thirty-eighth 

Congress,    1863-1864,    Vol.    IX,    No.    33,  p.  5.      The    years    end 


Imports  United  States 
Ycav.  from   Canada. 

1850 4,285,470 

1851 4,956,471 

1S52 4,589,y69 

1853 5,278,116 

1854 6,721,539 

1855 12,182,314 

1856 17,488,197 

1857 18,291,834 

1858 11,581,571 

1859 14,208,717 

I860 18,861,673 

1861 18,645,457 

1862 15,253,152 

1863 18,816,999 

From    "House   Executive  Documents, 
eighth  Congress,  1863-1864;  Vol.  IX,  No 
are  fiscal  years,  ending  June  30. 
5 


United  States  from 
Other  Provinces. 

1,358,992 

1,736,651 

1,520,330 

2,272,602 

2,206,021 

2,954,420 

3,822,224 

3,832,462 

4,224,948 

5,518,834 

4,989,708 

4,417,476 

4,046,843 

"    first   session    Thirty- 
32,  pp.  6-7.     The  years 


66 


Ajjpendix. 


[483 


Lkading  Exports  to  Buitisii  Provinces  Other  than  Canada, 

FROM  1849-1863. 


June  30, 1849... 

ia50... 

1851  .. 
1853... 
1853... 
1864... 
1856... 
1856... 
1857... 
1858... 
18&0,.. 
1860... 
1861... 
1863... 
1803... 


Wheat. 


333,766 
314,779 
330,310 
105,106 
308,956 
210,366 
183,614 
»J8,059 

133,187 

100,717 

90,049 

30,503 

16,583 

110,333 


WhMt  Flonr. 


I,.'>18,n33 

l,a51,.54(i 

»4.j,337 

OfH.OuO 

784,498 

955,484 

1,753,395 

3,130,787 

3,881  80;j 

3  018,913 

3,963,171 

3,044,343 

3,065  319 

3,199,308 

4,430,748 


136,791 

67,731 

00,lv«t 

80,2141 

105  404 

149,088 

l.'Vt  314 

130,774 

98,34ti 

85,210 

i>3,330 

85,915 

40,875 

05,358 

131,5,')3 


Indian  Corn.       Heal,  Corn  and  Rye, 


635,691 
431,113 
389,510 
137,718 
l;)5,U40 
378,395 
703,304 
(«1,959 
370,774 
348,420 
209,049 
306,881 
198,039 
354,183 
386,338 


"  House  Executive  Documents,"  1863-1864,  Vol.  IX,  No.  32,  p.  18. 


1858-1863. 

Manufactures  Exported  by  United  States  to  Province  op 

Canada. 


Cotton  Manufactures 

Hemp  "  [ia'»| 

Iron  Manufactures  [pj^^f^Qn^ 

■Leather,  Boots  and  Shoes 

Tobacco  manufactured 

Glassware 

Earthenware 

House  Furniture 

India-rubber  Manufactures.  •■ 

Carriages 

Books  

Paper  and  Stationery 

Jewelry 

Hats 

Tin  Manufactures 

Marble  &  Stone  Manufactures. 

Trunks  and  Umbrellas 

Clothing 

Wood  Manufactures 

Candles  and  Soap 

Paints  anil  Varnish 

Copper  &  Brass  Manufactures 

Musical  Instruments 

Printing  Materials 

Other  Enumerated 

Unenumerated 


1838-59.      1859-00.      1860-61.      1801-03.      1803-03. 


Total. 


$303,016 
32,763 

701,619 

311,147 

l,3a5,084 

86,233 

9,350 

130,706 

13,317 

20,449 

154,034 

18,836 

16,900 

110,150 

l.-.,451 

53,88;i 

5,470 

9,373 

45,146 

11,450 

27,lv3 

00,511; 

104,.5»t 

1,771 

31,990 

6i4,.534 

4,18,'5,616 


314,491 
31,971 

716,597 

137,475 

863,P34 

77,061 

11,151 

133,»51 

5,ai6| 

109,419! 
79,1341 
61,43(1 

.'>,700 
90,1U0 
30,5a5l 

109,009; 

1,575 
16,655 
43,547 

8,079 
33  521 
49,658 
91,732 

3,437 

6,605 
543,028 

3,548,114 


403,591 
43,664 

a39,43l 

106,648 

t83.875 
83,9.')0 
13,347 

134,3.50 
10,158 
11,117 

100,H34 

74,272 

13,954 

79,010 

4,:)03 

97,977 

2,577 

11,163 

36,593 

9,568 

39,903 

16,909 

122,800 

5„'!34 

12,770 

649,903 

3,601,043 


240,442 

10,378^ 

i 

773,381 j 

60,770, 

203,081 

121,3811 

13,1471 

li-8,829! 

1,1511 

35,0541 

62,838! 

72,376' 

11,046 

49,,505! 

l,376l 

97,002 

1,907 

8,494 

49,061 

4..583 

39,046 

32,238 

100,1X)7 

4,259 

8,190 

388^229 

2,596,930 


04,495 
10,566 

395,907 

22,800 
76,020 
87,(132 

8,244 
66,718 
538 
11,501 
25,164 
.55,171 

5,044 
14,078 

48,293 

],4:i4 

1,328 

.58,303 

3,438 

30,094 

.50,874 

67,445 

1,300 

4.784 

401,337 


1,510,803 


This  table  is  from  report  of  April,  1804,  "House  Reports,"  First 
Session,  Thirty-eighth  Congress,  Vol.  I.  39,  p.  5. 

See  also  "House  Executive  Documents,"  First  Session,  Thirty- 
eighth  Congress,  1863-1864,  Vol.  IX.  No.  32,  p.  15. 


4831 


Appendix. 


67 


Entered. 

Nationality  of   vessels  employed  in  the  carrying 

trade  between  the  United  States  and  British  North 
American  provinces  : 

Year.                                         American.  Foreign  Tonnage. 

1857-58  from  Canada 1,240,159  1,105,356 

From  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces 138,640  382,712 

1858-59  from  Canada 1,344,717  922,920 

From  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces. . . .      171,024  390,926 

1859-60  from  Canada 1.936,955  957,063 

From  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces 229,749  411,432 

1860-61  from  Canada 2,617,276  658,036 

From  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces 184,062  475,051 

1861-62  from  Canada 1,996,892  684,879 

From  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces. . . .      196,709  465,141 

Total 10,056,183  6,453,520 


Cleared. 

Nationality  of   vessels  employed  in  the  carrying 

trade  between  the  United  States  and  British  North 
American  provinces  : 

Year.                                         American.  Foreign  Tonnage. 

1857-58  to  Canada 1,133,584  1,104,650 

To  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces 319,985  461,245 

1858-59  to  Canada 1,364,580  1,012,358 

To  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces 242,407  475,329 

1859-60  to  Canada 1,982,586  1,083,506 

To  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces 371 ,257  516,646 

1860-61  to  Canada 2,678,276  896,124 

To  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces 291,812  599,430 

1861-62  to  Canada 2,025,670  731,123 

To  other  B.  N.  A.  provinces 297,172  509,928 

Total 10,707,329  7,391,399 

"  Reports  of  Committee."    (House)  1863-64,  Vol.  I,  No.  39,  p.  6. 


68  Appendix.  [484 

Value  of  goods  passing  through  the  United  States 
to  Canada  under  bond  : 

1855 4,463,774 

1856 4,926,922 

1857 5,582,643 

1858 2,057,024 

1859 4,546,491 

I860 3,041,877 

1861 5,688,952 

1862 5,508,437 

1863 

"  House  Executive  Documents."  1863-1864,  Vol.  IX,  No.  32,  p. 
36,  from  Canadian  records.  The  principal  portion  of  this  trade 
passes  over  the  railroad  line,  entering  Canada  at  Island  Pond,  Ver- 
mont (by  the  Grand  Trunk). 


PRINCIPAL  REFERENCES. 


"House  Executive  Documents,"  1849-1850;  Vol.  8,  No.  6i. 
"Message  of  President  Taylor  upon  Reciprocal  Trade  with 
Canada,"  with  correspondence,  May,  1850. 

"  House  Executive  Documents,"  18.51-1862;  Vol.  2,  parti.  No.  2, 
pp.  83-92.  "Annual  Message"  of  President  Fillmore,  December, 
1851;  with  correspondence  upon  commercial  intercourse  with 
Canada. 

"  House  Executive  Documents,"  1852-185:5;  Vol.  4,  No.  40.  "Mes- 
sage" of  President  Fillmore  transmitting  "  Report  of  the  Secretary 
of  State  upon  the  Negotiations  for  Reciprocity  with  Canada." 

"Reports  of  Commit*.  >s,"  (House)  1852-53,  No.  4.  "  Report  of 
Committee  on  Commercfc  on  Reciprocal  Trade  with  the  British 
North  American  Colonies;"  with  statistics  and  correspondence. 

The  Congressional  Globe;  especially  Part  3,  1863-1864,  May  18,  19, 
24,  25  and  26,  1864;  containing  the  principal  debate  in  the  House 
upon  the  treaty;  and  Part  1,  1864-1865,  January  13  and  12,  1865, 
containing  the  principal  debate  in  the  Senate. 

"House  Executive  Documents,"  1859-18()0,  Vol.  KJ,  No.  96. 
Rejiort  of  Israel  T.  Hatch  and  James  W.  Taylor  upon  the  treaty. 

"Reports  of  Committees"  (House)  1861-1862;  Vol.  3,  No.  22. 
Rejmrt  of  Committee  on  Commerce  upon  the  treaty,  prepared  by 
Eiijah  Ward,  of  New  York. 

"Report  of  the  Minister  of  Finance,  A.  T.  Gait,  of  Canada,  upon 
the  '  Report  of  the  Committee  on  Commerce  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives of  the  United  States.'  A  reply  to  the  preceding 
Report."    March,  1862. 

"  House  Executive  Documents,"  1863-64;  Vol.  9,  No.  32.  Letter 
from  Secretary  of  Treasury  on  treaty,  with  many  statistical  tables. 

"Reports  of  Committees"  (House)  1863-64;  Vol.  1,  No.  39. 
Report  of  committee  on  commerce  upon  the  treaty,  prepared 
by  Elijah  Ward  of  New  York. 

"Proceedings  of  the  Commercial  Convention  held  in  Detroit 
July  11-14,  1865."  Published  by  order  of  the  convention.  Detroit, 
1865. 


n 


Principal  References, 


[486 


W  J/m  V      t"  ?»'"'"«'"*'.  financial  and  other  subjects  of  Elijah 

Zhv«'  If  •  ^?°i'  ''^^=  ''P""""y  P^-  ^^«7  and  88-99.    Speeches 
delivered  m  the  House  of  Representatives  May  18  and  26,  1864 

w  .V*    M    ,*"^ '^®  ^*'**®''-     Recollections,  1851-1885.    Sir  E    W 
Watkm,  '    London.    1887.      Chap.    XVIII.    pp.    374-430.      "The 
Reciprocity  Treaty  with  the  United  States." 
Yn'rk'^fj/  Lawrence  Oliphant."    Mrs.  M.  O.  W.  Oliphant,  New 
York,  1891.  two  volumes.    Vol.  I,  Chap  IV,  106-132 


J6 
ih 

3S 

I. 

le 


^ 


PUBLICATIONS 


OK   THU 


AMERICAN 


Economic  Association 


Volume  vii 


AMERICAN  ECONOMIC  ASSOCIATION, 

1892. 


•  •(.I'YKKMIT,   l.S!):.',   IIY  AMEKICAN   ECONOMIC  ASSOCIATION. 


CONTENTS   OF   VOLUME    VII. 


% 


l.-THESILVER  SITUATION  INTHEUNITEDSTATES: 
By  Professor  F.  \V.  Tai'ssig,  LL.  B.,  Ph.  I). 

I.     The  P]conoinic  situation 1-118 

II.     Tlio  Argument  for  Silver 

2  and  3. -ON    THE    SHIFTING    AND    INX'IDENCE  OF 
TAXATION: 
By  Professor  EinviN  R.  A.  Seligman,  LL.B.,  Ph. I).  119-310 

4  and  5.— SINKING  FUNDS: 

By  Professor  Edward  A.  Ross,  Pii.  D 311-416 

6.-THE  RECIPROCITY  TREATY  WITH  CANADA  OF 
1854: 
By  Professor  F.  E.  Haynes,  Pii.  D 417-486 


IE 


AMERICAN    ECONOMIC    ASSOCIATION, 

Organized  at  Saratoga,  September  gtb,  1885, 


OFFICERS. 

President  : 
Francis  A.  Walkeh,  LL.  D. 

Vice-Presidents  : 
Charles  F.  Dunbar,  A.  B. 
Willi* M  \V.  Folwell,  LL.  D. 
Carroll  D.  Wright,  A.  M. 

Secretary  : 
Richard  T.  Ely,  Ph.  D., 

University  of  Wisconsin,  Madison,  Wis. 

Treasurer : 
Frederick  B.  Hawley,  A.  M., 

141  Pearl  Street,  New  York  City. 

PUBLICATION   OOMMITTBB. 

F.  H.  GiDDiNGs,  A.  M.,  Chairman. 

Bryn  Mawr  College,  Bryn  Mawr,  Pa. 
H.  C.  Adams,  Ph.  D. 
J.  B.  Clark,  Ph.  D. 

E.  R.  A.  Seligman,  Ph.  D. 

F.  W.  Taussig,  Ph.  D. 


Resolution  of  the  Council. — All  monographs  or  other  scientific  publica- 
tions bhall  bear  the  names  of  the  Committee  on  Publication. 


All  communications  of  an  editorial  nature  should  be  addressed  to  Prof. 
F.  H.  GiDDiNGS,  Bryn  Mawr,  Pa. 

Orders  for  monographs  and  all  communications  of  a  business  nature 
should  be  addressed  to  the  Publication  Agent,  America"  Economic 
Association,  Baltimore,  Md. 


EXTRACT  FROM  THE  CONSTITUTION. 
ARTICLE  IV.— Membership. 
Any  person  may  become  a  member  of  this  Association  by  paying 
three  dollars,  and  after  the  first  year  may  continue  a  member  by 
paying  an  annual  fee  of  three  dollars.  On  payment  of  fifty 
dollars  any  person  may  become  a  life-member,  extrnpt  from  annual 
dues. 

Note. — Each  member  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  all  reports  and  publi- 
cations of  the  Association. 


ERRATA. 


Nos.  2  and  3 


On  the  Shifting  and  Incidence  of  Taxation. 


Page  18,  Line  1.     Erase  part. 


<( 
<i 
II 
<i 
II 
II 
<i 


27, 

47, 

47, 

47, 

55, 

71, 

71, 

72, 

90, 

98, 

100, 

"   109, 

"   122, 

"   127, 

"  135, 

"   149, 

"   156, 

"   166, 

"   167, 

"   183, 

"   189, 

"   190, 

"   190. 

"   190. 


"     15.     For  France  read  France". 
Note  1,  Line  12.     For  "Cort  read  Cort. 


1. 
2, 
1, 
1, 
2, 


12. 
2. 
3. 
1. 
1. 


Leeiboek  read  "Leerboek. 

Wages  Question  read  "The  Wages  Question". 

L'lmpot  read  "L'Impot". 

Grundsiite  read  Grundsatze. 

Ruckwiiizung  read  Riickwalzung. 
Note  2  should  follow  Note  1. 
Line  12.     For  area  greed  read  are  agreed. 
Note  1,  Line  2.     For  16  read  164. 

"    li      "    2.       "     "In  his  Reports  read  In  his  "Reports. 
Note.    For  62  read  60. 
Note,  Line  7.    For  132  read  126. 
Note  1,  Line  1.    For  127  read  121. 

"      »     "    2.      "    "his  Einleitung  read  his  "Einleitung. 
Line  18.     Erase  by. 
Note,  Line  15.    For  EO,  read  FO. 
Note  1,  Line  1.    For  101  read  95. 
Note,  Line  1.    For  137  read  130. 
Note.     For  91  read  89. 

r  i:nes  from  bottom      For  Maquis  read  Marquis. 
Line  14,     For  fur  read  fiir. 
For  Stewart,  James  read  Steuart,  James. 

"    Steuart,  Dugald  r-^ad  Stewart,  Dugald. 


I 


Ml 


INDEX 


^^OILiTJAdlE   ^^11. 


Publications  of  the  American  Economic  Association. 


Absolute  (The)  Theory  of  in- 
cidence   147-157 

Act  of  1878  (Bland  Bill),  8- 
15;  relation  of  banks  to, 
15-17;  repealed 60-51 

Agnostic  Theory  of  taxation, 

Agricultural    (The)    classes 

and  prices 100-106 

Agricultural  land,  Tax  on, 

205-218 
Amortization,     Theory    of, 
170-180,  39(1-416;   in  Eng- 
land, 319-330;  in  America, 

331-395 
Annuities,  Terminable,  33( . 

410-411 416 

Arnold,  Mr.  and  The  Reci- 
procity Treaty  of  1854 438 

Bank  deposits,  Effect  on 
prices,  65-66;  increase  in 
(1878-90),  114  and  note,  25- 
26;  decline  in  (1884-5). .  .28-29 

Bank  notes.  Circulation  of 
(1878-90),  45;  decline  in 
(1886) 40-43 

Bank  reserves 115 

Banks  (The),  and  the  Act  of 
1878,  15-17;  N.  Y.  banks 
and  gold  reserve,  35-36; 
and  the  treasury  notes.  .52-53 


Baring's  banking  house,  56,    60 

Bi-metallism,  Ax^Vb  for,  84- 
01;  objections  to 91-118 

Bland  Bill,  8-15;  relation  of 
banks  to 15-17 

Blunden,  Mr.,  Incidence  of 
Urban  rates,  note 239 

Bolles,  A.  S.,  Views  on  tax- 
ation    169 

British  provinces.  See 
C'iuiiida. 

Broglie,  De,  Views  on  taxa- 

„t'on 164 

Buchanan.  D.,  Views  on  tax- 
ation   193 

Building,  Tax  on 242-244 

c 

Canada  and  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty  of  1854 417-486 

Canals,  Canadian,  Naviga- 
tion of 424,  467-473 

Canard,  Views  on  taxation, 

r.      .,.  157-161 

tantillon,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion   1S9 

Capital,  Tax  on 248-257 

Capitalization  Theory  of  tax- 
ation  I70-I8O 

Certi  (icates,  Silver.  See 
Silver  certiiieates. 

Cherbuliez,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion  161-162 

Circulati'ii  of  silver,  15-21; 
periods  of 21-62 


II 


Index. 


"iW 


City  real  estate,  Tax  on,  219-246 

Cliffe-Leslie,  on  taxation, 
195-190;  on  rent,  note 242 

Commerce  between  U.  S. 
and  Canada 446,  450-452 

Commodities,  Tax  on,  137- 
138 266-268 

Congress  and  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty  of  1854 436-444 

Conigliani,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion  203-204 

Convention  at  Detroit  and 
Reciprocity  Treaty 445 

Courcelle  Seneuil,  Views  on 
taxation 161 

Cournot,  on  taxation,  i76, 
274-275;  quantitative 
tlieory  of 198-199 

Craig,  J.,  Views  on  taxation, 
171 ;  on  land  tax 175 

Credit,  Efifect  of,  on  prices, 
03-65;  affected  by  money 
circulation 79 

Creditors  and  rising  prices, 

107-108 

Crisis  of  1890 56-58 

Crops,  Effect  of,  on  circula- 
tion of  currency,  18-19,  25-26 

Currency,  Expansion  of,  113-115 

Customs  receipts  (1890-91,  55 
ixnil  note;  (1883-86)  ;w<«. . .     30 

X) 

Davenant,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion    139 

Decker,  Sir  Matthew,  Views 
on  taxation 135-136 

Debt,  Public,  33;  liquidation 
of 313-416 

Debtor  class  and  falling 
prices,  86-87,  89-91 94-95 

Depression  of  trade  and 
silver  circulation ...  .28-29 

Diffusion  theory  of  taxation, 

167-167 

Diminishing  returns,  260- 
262,  264  note,  269-270 273 

Dollar  coins.  Circulation  of, 19-20 

Du  Poynode,  Views  on  tax- 
ation    186 

Duties  on  Canadian  imports, 

461-465 

Eclectic  theory  of  taxation, 

180-196 


Elgin,  Lord,  and  the  Reci- 
procity  Act  of   1854,  426, 

430-434 

Erie  Canal 471 

Exports  from  U.  S.  to 
Canada 460 

Fairchild,    Plan    for    silver 

issues 117-118 

Falck,  G.  von.  Incidence  of 

taxation,  note 129 

Farm  land.  Tax  on 205-218 

Farmer    (The)    and    falling 

prices 100-106 

Fauveau,  Views  on  taxation, 

199-200 
Fawcett,  Views  on  taxation, 

195;  note 244 

Fisheries  Question.. 429 

Florez-Estrada,    Views    on 

taxation 207,  209 

Free  coinage  of  silver 81-82 

Funding  Act 344-346 

O- 

Gallatin  and  the  sinking 
fund,  370-378 409 

Gamier,  Views  on  taxation, 
173 183-184 

Gibbon,  Alex.,  Views  on 
taxation 166 

Gold,  Stability  of,  90;  effect 
of  premium  on,  74-75;  as 
a  standard  of  value,  106- 
113;  free  coinage  of,  82; 
suspension  of  payments 
in 76 

Gold  reserve,  37-40,  73-74, 

54,  66,  30-31..., 34-36 

Gold  standard  and  debtor 
class 86-91 

Gold  supply  in  U.  S.,  75  note; 
and  bank  reserves 115-116 

Greenbacks,  32-33,  36-37,  45-48 

Greg,  on  the  land  tax 174 

Ground  rents,  Tax  on,  223- 
224,  232-234,  235-239,  241- 
242 246 

23: 

Hamilto  1,  Plan  for  a  sink- 
ing f unu  353, 355-358 , 362- 
363 ' 408 


Index. 


Ill 


Hamlin,  Hannibal,  on  Reci- 
procity Treaty  of  1854 441 

Held,  A.,  Views  on  taxation, 
,,     ,  196-197 
Hock,  von,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion  189-191 

House  rents,  Tax  on 225-234 

Hume,  Views  on  taxation, 
142;  on  fsHing  values 88 


Imports  from  U.  S.  to  Canada, 
460-466;  from  Canada  to 

U.  S 460-466 

Imports.     See  Taxes. 
Incidence  of  taxation,  by  E. 

R.  A.  Seligman 125-309 

Income  tax 296-297 

Increasing    returns    in    in- 
dustry, 260-261,  270 273 

Industry,   Effect    of    prices 

on,  88-89 98-100 

Inflation  Bill,  Veto  of 10 

Interest,  Tax  on 145-150 

Internal  revenue  tax 295 


Jenkin,  F.,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion  200-201 

Jones,  R.,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion  192-193 

Kaizl,  on  incidence  of  taxa- 
tion, no<e 129 


Land,  Tax  on,  136-137,  170, 
148-149,  174-175 205-208 

Larned,  Mr.,Report  on  trade 
with  Canada 450 

Lassalle,  Views  on  taxation, 

197-198 

Leroy-Beaulieu,  Views  on 
taxation 186-187 

License  taxes 286-288 

Liquidation  of  public  debt. 
See  Sinking  fund. 

Locke,  J.,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion  137-139 

Luxuries,  Tax  on,  151-152. .  267 


2.C 


Mansfield,  Lord,  Views  on 
taxation 165 

Manufactures  exported  from 
U.  S.  to  Canada 466-467 

Marcy,  Wm.  L.,  and  the 
Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854, 

431-433 

Marshal], Viewson taxation,  203 

Martin,  R.  M.,  Views  on 
taxation 165-166 

Mathematical  theory  of  tax- 
ation   198-204 

McCulloch,  Sec,  31 194-195 

Mill,  J.  S.,  on  land  tax,  175, 
on  falling  values,  88;  on 
taxation,  194 212 

Mill,  James,  Views  on  tax- 
ation  193-194 

Money  supply,  Effect  of,  on 
industry 88-89 

Monopoly  value,  Law  of,  278-279 

Morrill,  J.  S.,  and  the  Reci- 
procity Treaty  of  1854.438-439 

Morris,  Robt.,and  the  public 
debt 335-336 

Multiple  standard 111-112 

Mun,  Thos.,  Views  on  tax- 
ation   131-132 

N 

National    bank  notes.      See 

U.  S.  bank  notes. 
National  debt,  Liquidation 

of 313-416 

Navigation,  Free,  of  the  St. 

Lawrence 424,  467 

Negative  theory  of  taxation, 

196-197 


Optimistic  theory   of  taxa- 
tion  157-167 


Pantaleoni,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion, 201-202;  on  rent,  222 
note  and 228-229 

Parieu,  Views  on  taxation, 

184-186 


IV 


Index. 


Pessimistic  theory  of  taxa- 
tion  167-169 

Petty,  Sir  Wm.,  Views  on 
taxation 132-134 

Physiocrats,  Views  of,  on 
taxation,  13(5 145-147 

Pitt.on  tlie  sinking  fund,  324-326 

Poll  tax 295 

Price,  Dr.,  on  the  sinking 
fund ...322-324 

Prices,  Theory  of,  63-67,  79, 
83;  effect  of,  on  industry, 
88-89,  98-100;  on  debtor 
class,  86-87,  94-95;  falling, 
91  note,  93-94,  100-106;  ris- 
ing   107-108 

Prince-Smith,  Views  on  tax- 
ation  191-192 

Prittwitz,  Views  on  taxation,   162 

Production,  Tax  on 265 

Profits,  Tax  on,  149,  258-265, 
276,  282-286 213-218 

Property,  Tax  on  personal, 
247-248;  Tax  on  selling 
value  of.. 213-218 

Proudhon,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion  168-169 

Public  debt.  Liquidation  of, 

313-416 

Q 

Quantitative  theory  of  tax- 
ation   ■. 198-204 

Rate  (The)  tax 243-244 

Ran,  on  a  land  tax,  176-177; 

on  taxation 188-189 

Raw  materials  exported  from 

U.  S.  to  ( 'anada 455 

Real  estate.  Urban,  Tax  on, 

219-246 
Receipts,  Tax  on  gross,  280; 

on  net 282-286 

Reciprocity  Treaty  of   1854, 

by  Frederick  E.  llaynes, 

417-481) 
Redemption  of  public  debt. 

See  Sinking  fund. 
Rent,  Tax  on  economic,  208- 

209;  Ricardo  on 152-154 

Resumption  Act  (1875) 37 

Revenues.  See  Tariff,  Taxa- 
tion, Sinking  fund. 


Ricardo,  Views  on  taxation, 
147-148,  152-157;  tax  on 
wages,  292-294;  on  prop- 
erty tax 214-216 

Ross,  Edward,  Sinking 
Funds 313-416 


Sargant's  "Urban  Rating," 

note 244 

Say,  J.  B.,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion, 180-182 172 

ShiifHe,  Land  tax 177 

Seligman,  E.  U.  A.,  Shifting 
and  incidence  of  taxation, 

125-309 
Senior,  Views  on  taxation  .  194 
Sherman,  I.,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion   167 

Shifting  and  incidence  of 
taxation,  by  E.  R.  A.  Selig- 
man   125-309 

Silver  certificates,  43,  45-47, 

9-10,22-24,31-32 34 

j   Silver    dollar  (The),   45,   46 

note 51 

I  Silver  Situation,  The,  by  F. 
W.  Taussig.  1-118;  cur- 
rency, 65-67;  stability  of, 
I  88;  issue  of,  117-118;  as  a 
standard,  106-113;  in- 
crease of,  108-109;  amount 
in  treasury,  21,  23,  28;  cir- 

!       cMilation 15-62 

I  Single  tax,  on  houses,  134- 

136;  on  land,  136-140.  .222-224 
i   Sinking  fund  (The),  bv  E.  A. 

!       Ross .'...313-416 

I  Sismondi,   Views  on    taxa- 

I       tion 182-183 

Smith,   Adam,  on  taxation, 

!       148-152 275 

;   Smith,  Goldwin,  on  a  "Com- 
merce of  Convenience". . .  451 
'   Socialistic   (The)   theory   of 

incidence .".197-198 

Soetbeer,  Prof.,  Index  to 
falling  prices,  91  note;  on 

silver  production 109 

Specie  payments,  10 37 

Stability,  Relative,    of  gold 

and  silver 90-91 

Standards  of  value 106-113 


Index, 


Statistics  of  trade  between 

U.  S.  and  Canada 475-488 

Stein,   Views    on    taxation, 

164-165 173 

Stewart,  Dngald,  on  taxation,  145 
Steuart,  f^ir  Jarae.s,  on  taxa- 
tion  142-146 

Subsidiary  coins 65 

Sumner,   Senator,   and    the 
Reciprocity  Treaty  of  1854  439 

T 

Tabular  (The)  Standard. .  111-112 
Tariff    between    U.   S.   and 

Canada 463-465 

Taussig,  F.  W.,  The  Silver 

Situation  in  the  U.  S 1-118 

Tax  (A)  on  consumption 130 

Tax  rate 235-246 

Taxation,  The  vShifting  and 

Incidence  of,  by  E.  R.  A. 

Seligman 125-309 

Terminable   annuities,   330, 

410-411 416 

Thiers,  A.,   Views  on  taxa- 
tion   162-164 

Thiinen,   von,  on  taxation, 

242-243 

Tith  es 212-213 

Trade  between    U.   S.  und 

Canada 475-486 

Treasury  notes,  50-53,  56,  70-71 
Treaty,  (The)  Reciprocity  of 

1854 417-486 

IJ.  S.  notes,  circulation,  45, 
36-37 47-48 


U.  S.,  The  Silver  Situation 

in,  by  F.  W.  Taussig. . .  .1-118 
Urban  real  estate.  Tax  on, 

219-246 


Value  of  8    ver  and  gold  as 

standards 106-113 

Vanderlint,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion   140 

Verri,  Views  on  taxation.. .  157 
Vignis,  Views  on  taxation..  186 
von  Thiinen,  Views  on  tax- 
ation   187 


Wages,  Tax  on,  290-294,  150- 
151,  154-156;  rise  in 96 

Walker,  F.  A.,  on  money 
supply 89 

Walpole-Stanhope,  on  the 
sinking  fund 319-320 

Wairas,  Views  on  taxation..  202 

War  debt  and  the  sinking 
fund 378-383 

Ward,  Elijah,  and  the  Reci- 
procity Treaty  of  1854.436-437 

Webb,  S.,  On  house  rent,-229-230 

Wells,  D.  A.,  Views  on  tax- 
ation   166 

Wilson,  Senator,  on  Reci- 
procity Treaty  of  1854 444 

Wolowski,  Views  on  taxa- 
tion   173 


t 

f 


CANTILLON'S 
ESSAI 


SUR 


LE  COMMERCE. 


Reprinted  for  Harvard  University. 


This  reprint  of  an  important  work,  hitherto  inaccessible  for 
most  economists,  follows  in  pagination  and  general  typograph- 
ifcal  style  the  edition  of  1755. 


Price,  $1.50. 


GEO.  H.  ELLIS,  Publisher, 

l-il  Frankun  Street, 

Boston. 


London,  Eng. 
MACMILLAN  &  CO. 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


1.0 


I.I 


lA^|2a    |2.5 

■so    i^^"      ■■■ 

■^  1^    |2.2 
1^   US,    12.0 


HJ4 


IL25  iiiu 


=)R3^'?'f^i'PJrf 


JOHNS    HOPKINS    UNIVERSITY 

Studies  in  History  and  Politics. 

Edited  by  Herbert  B.  Adams. 
Eleventh   Annual   Series    1893.      Price  $3.00. 

THE  SOCIAL  CONDITION  OF  LABOR,    By  Dr.  E.  R.  L.  Gould. 

THE    WORLD'S    RHPRKSENTATIVE    ASSEMBLIES    OK    TO-DAY:    A  STUDY  IN 

COMPARATIVE  LEGISLATION.    By  Professor  Edmund  K.  Aldun. 
HISTORY  OF  SLAVERY  IN  CONNECTICUT.    By  Dr.  B.  C.  Steiner. 
THE  CINCINNATI  SOUTHERN  RAILWAY;     A  STUDY  IN  MUNICIPAL  ACTIVITY. 

By  Mr.  J.  H.  Hollander. 

JARED  SPARKS  AND  DE  TOCQUEVILLK.    By  Professor  Herbert  B.  Adams. 

POPULAR  REVOLUTIONS  IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES.    By  Dr.  George  Krieii.n. 

CHURCH  AND  STATE  IN  NORTH  CAROLINA.    By  Professor  Stephen  B.  Weeks. 

LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  IN  THE  SOUTH  AND  SOUTHWEST.    By  Professor  Edward 
W.  Bbmis  and  others. 

THE  NEGRO  IN  THE  DISTRICT  OF  COLUMBIA.    By  Mr.  Edward  Ingle. 

PROGRESS  OF  AMERICAN  HISTORICAL  LITERATURE.    By  Dr.  J.  M.  Vincent. 

PROGRESS  OF  A.\IERICAN  ECONOMIC  LITERATURE.    By  Dr.  Sidney  Sherwood. 

ANNUAIi  SEBIES.  1883-1802. 

SERIES  I.— Local  Institutions.    479  pages.    I4.00. 

SERIES  II.— Institutions  and  ISconom-.cs.    629  pages.    I4.00. 

SERIES  III.— Maryland,  Virginia  and  Washington.    595  pages.    $4.00. 

SERIES  IV.— Municipal  Qovernment  and  Iiand  Tenure.    600  pages.    $3.50. 

SERIES  v.— Municipal  Qovernment,  History  and  Politics.  559  pages.  $3.50. 

SERIES  VI.— The  History  of  Co-operation  in  the  United  States.  540pp.  J3.50 

SERIES  VII.— Social  Science,  Municipal  and  Federal  Oovernment.  13.50. 

SERIES  VIIL— History,  Politics  and  Education.    625  pp.    8vo,    I3.50. 

SERIES  IX.— Education,  History  and  Politics.    640  pp.   8vo.    $3.50. 

SERIES  X— Church  and  State:    Columbus  and  America.    630  pp.  8vo.  f3.5o. 

RECENT   EXTRA    VOLUMES. 

THE  SUPREME  COURT  OF   THE   UNITED  STATES.     By   W.  W.  Willouqhby. 

124  pp.    Svo.  cluth.    $1.25. 
THE  INTERCOURSE  BETWEEN  JAPAN  AND  THE  UNITED  STATES,      Inazo 

(Ota)  Nitobe.    198  pp.    Svo.  cloth.    I1.25. 
STATE   AND   FEDERAL   GOVERNMENT  IN  SWITZERLAND.    By  John  Martin 

Vincent.    225  pp.    8vo.  cloth.    $1.50. 

SPANISH   INSTITUTIONS   OF    THE    SOUTHWEST.      By    Frank   W.   Blackmar. 

380  pp.  and  31  plates.    Svo.  cloth.    $2.00. 
INTRODUCTION    TO    THE    STUDY    OF    THE    CONSTITUTION.    By  M.  M.  Cohn. 

250  pp.    Svo.  cloth.    I1.50. 
THE  OLD  ENGLISH  MANOR.    By  Prof.  C.  M.  Andrews.    280  pp.    Svo.  cloth.    $1.50. 
AMERICA:     ITS  GEOGRAPHICAL  HISTORY,    1492-1892.      By  Dr.    W.    B.    ScaiFb. 

176  pp.    Svo.  cloth.    $1.50. 


The  set  of  ten  series  is  now  ofTered  in  a  handsome  library  edition  for  I30.00,  and 
Including  subscription  to  the  current  (eleventh)  series,  I33.00,  The  ten  series  with 
twelve  extra  volumes,  altogether  twenty-two  volumes,  for  $48,00. 

Orders  should  be  addressed  to 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  PRESS,  BALTIMORE,  MARYLAND. 


POBUGATIOMS  OF  THE  DNIYERSITT  OF  PEX!ISYLYtXIi. 


political  Econonj  j  and  public  Law  ^Bi>ie^. 

EDMUND  J.  JAMES,  Ph.D.,  Editor. 

This  series  consists  of  a  number  of  valuable  monographs  representing 
the  fruit  of  the  most  recent  research  upon  the  subjects  of  which  they 
treat.    Up  to  the  present  time,  eleven  numbers  have  appeared. 

VOIiUMI!  I 

No.  1. — Wharton  School  Annals  of  Political  Science.    (Out  of  print.) 

No.  2. — Anti-Rent  Agitation.    Prof.  E.  P.  Cheynky.     Price,  50  cents. 

No.  3. — Ground  Rents  in  Philadelphia.    Boies  Penrose,  of  the  Philadel- 
phia Bar.     Price,  25  cents. 

No.  4.— Consumption  of  Wealth.    Prof.  S.  N.  Patten.     Price,  50  cents. 

No.  5. — Prison  Statistics.    Dr.  Roland  P.  Falkner,     Price,  25  cents. 

No.  6. — Rational  Principles  of  Taxation.    Prof.  S.  N.  Patten.    Price,  50 
cents. 

No.  7. — Federal  Constitution  of  Germany,  with  Historical  Introduction. 
Prof.  E.  J.  .Tames.    Price,  50  cents. 

No.  8. — Federal  Constitution  of  Switzerland.     Translated  by  Prof.  E.  J. 
James.    Price,  50  cents. 

Price  of  Nos.  2  to  8  in  one  order  $2.40. 

VOLUME   II. 
Our  Sheep  and  the  Tariff.     William  Draper  Lewis,  Ph.D.,  late  Fellow 
in  Wharton  School  of  Finance  and  Economy.    Price,  cloth, 
$2.00. 

VOLUMI3  III. 
The  first  two  numbers  of  the  tbinl  volume  are  announced  for  early  publication. 
No.  1. — German  Bundesrath.      A  study  in  comparative  constitutional 
law.    James  Harvey  Robinson.    Price,  75  cents. 
This  Institution  is  the  very  centre  and  core  of  the  existing  form  of  Rovemraent  in 
Germany,  and  deserves  to  bo  much  better  known  bj  students  of  constitutional  gov- 
ernment. 

No.  2. — The  Theory  of  Dynamic   Economics.    Prof.  Simon  N.  Patten. 

Price,  $1.00. 

A  review  and  criticism  of  the  new  political  economy  from  the  standpoint  of  con- 
sumption. 

Price  of  Nos.  2  to  11  in  one  order  $4.50. 


PDBLlCiTIOHS  OF  THE  UNITERSITY  OF  FEllllSTLYAHIIl. 


Wharton  School  Studies  in  Politics  and  Economics. 

This  series  will  consist  of  monographs  by  the  students  of  the  Wharton 
School  of  Finance  and  Economy. 

NUMBBB  I 
The  Recent  Development  of  American  Industries.     By  The  Class  of  '91. 
Price,  50  cents;  cloth,  $1.00. 


All  persons  interested  in  the  study  of  Economic,  Political  and  Social 
Questions,  whether  in  College,  the  Law,  the  Church  or  Business,  should 
subscribe  for  the 

Annals  of  the  American  Academy 

OF  POLITICAL   AND  SOCIAL  SCIENCE. 

This  Journal  is  now  universally  recognized  as  one  of  the  foremost 
in  its  field  and  as  an  invaluable  aid  to  every  person  interested  in  the 
great  questions  of  the  day.  The  following  are  a  few  of  the  subjects 
which  have  been  treated  of  in  recent  numbers  of  the  AnnA1,s  :  "  Ethical 
Training  in  the  Public  Schools  ;"  "Ethics  <.f  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence ;  "  "  Municipal  Government ; "  "  The  Party  System  ;  "  '  'The 
Australian  System  of  Voting;"  "Public  Regulation  of  Industries;" 
"  Socialism  ;  "  "  The  Land  System  ;  "  "  International  Arbitration  ;  " 
"The  Condition  of  the  Russian  Peasantry  ;  "  "  Prohibition  ; "  "  Com- 
pulsory Voting  ;  "  "  The  Referendum  ;  "  "  Wage  Theories  ;  "  "  Soci- 
ology ;  "  "Congress  and  the  Cabinet ;  "  "  River  and  Harbor  Legisla- 
tion ;  "  "Political  Economy  in  Italy  and  in  Austria  ; "  "Value;" 
"Interest ;  "  "  Wealth  ;  "  "  Conception  of  Sovereignty  ;  "  "  Natural 
Law."  etc.,  etc.  These  papers  were  contributed  by  leading  writers  of 
the  United  States  and  Europe. 

In  July,  1892,  the  current  number.  Vol.  Ill,  No.  i,  appeared.     It  con- 
tains the  following  articles : 
Cabinet  Government  in  the  United  States. 

Professor  Freeman  Snow,  of  Harvard  University. 

Geometrical  Theory  of  the  Determination  oe  Prices. 

Professor  L^on  Walras,  of  the  University  of  Lausanne,  Switz- 
erland. 

ScHOOi,  Savings  Banks. 

Mrs.  S.  L.   Oberholtzer,  Superintendent  of  School  Savings 
Bank  Department  of  W.  C.  T.  U. 
Theory  op  Dynamic  Economics, 

Professor  J.  B.  Clark,  of  Smith  College. 
The  Rates  Question  in  Recent  Railroad  Literature. 

Professor  S.  Sterwood,  of  Johns  Hopkins  University. 

Basis  oe  Interest. 

Hon.  B.  F.  Hughes. 

Book  Reviews  ;    Personal  Notes  ;   Miscellany. 


PRICE.  $6.00  PER  YEAR. 


The  Annals  is  sent  free  to  all  members  of  the  Academy. 


An  invitation  is  extended  to  those  who  wish  to  keep  abreast 
with  the  advance  work  which  is  being  carried  on  along  the  lines  of 
Political  and  Social  Science,  to  enter  into  correspondence  with  the 
American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science,  for  the  purpose  of 
investigating  its  aims  and  methods,  or  to  apply  to  the  Council  for 
election  to  membership. 

AMERICAN  ACADEMY  OF  POLITICAL  AND  SOCIAL  SCIENCE, 

STATION  B,  PHILADELPHIA,  PA. 


Studies  in  History,  Economics  and  Public  Law, 

.    .  EDITED   BY 

THE  UNIVERSITY  FACULTY  OK  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 
OF  COLUMBIA  COLLEGE. 


It  con- 


The  monographs  are  chosen  mainlj'  from  among  the  doctors' 
dissertions  in  Political  Science,  but  are  not  necessarily  confined 
to  these.  Only  those  studies  are  included  which  form  a  distinct 
contribution  to  science  and  which  are  positive  works  of  original 
research.  The  monographs  are  published  at  irregular  intervals, 
but  are  paged  consecutively  as  well  as  separately,  so  as  to  form 
completed  volumes. 

VOLUME  I. 

1.  The  Divorce  Problem— A  Study  in  Statistics.    By  Walter 
F.  WitLCOX,  Ph.  D.    Price,  50  cents. 

2.  The  History  of  Tariff  Administrative  in  the  United  States, 
from  Colonial  Times  to  the  McKinley  Administration  Bill.    By 

John  Dean  Goss,  Ph.  I).     Price,  5o  cents. 

3.  History  of  Municipal  I^and  Ownership  on  Manhattan 
Island.    By  GEORGE  AsHTON  Black,  Ph.  D.     Price,  50  cents. 

4.  Financial  History  of  Massachusetts.  By  Charles  H.  j. 
Douglas.    Price,  |i.oo. 

VOLUME  1.  Complete.     Price,  I2.00. 


VOLUME  II. 

I.  The  Economics  of  the  Russian  Villag^e. 

(Ready  in  November,  1892.) 


By  I.  ly.  HouRWiCH. 


For  further  particulars  apply  to 

Prof.  Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman, 

Columbia  College,  New  York. 


THE  NEW  WORLD. 

A  QUARTERLY  REVIEW  OF  RELIGION,  ETHICS  AND  THEOLOGY. 


March,  June,  September,  December. 


I 


Each  number  will  contain  200  pages,  three-fourths  of  which 
will  be  devoted  to  articles  of  solid  worth,  and  the  remainder  to 
careful  reviews  of  important  new  books  in  the  field  which  the 
periodical  is  to  cultivate,  and  a  survey  of  valuable  and  pertinent 
articles  in  other  Reviews. 

The  New  World  will  be  under  the  charge  of  an  Editorial 
Board,  consisting  of  Professors  Charles  Carroll  Everett  and 
Crawford  Howell  Toy  of  Harvard  University,  President  Orello 
Cone  of  Buchtel  College,  and  Rev.  Nicholas  Paine  Oilman  (the 
managing  editor,  to  be  addressed  at  No.  25  Beacon  St.,  Boston). 
It  will  discuss  the  great  problems  of  Religion,  Ethics  and  Theo- 
logy in  a  liberal  and  progressive  spirit.  The  cooperation  has 
been  secured  of  numerous  eminent  students  of  theology,  and 
exponents  of  religion,  at  home  and  abroad;  and  the  new 
quarterly  will  be  open  to  able  and  ronstructive  thinkers,  with- 
out regard  to  sectarian  lines.  Th-  v  World  which  its  editors 
have  in  mind  is  that  which  is  dc  .  sloping  under  the  light  of 
modern  science,  philosophy,  criticism  and  philanthropy, — all  of 
which,  rightly  viewed,  are  the  friends  and  helpers  of  enduring 
religious  faith.  To  positive  and  constructive  statements  of  such 
an  order  of  things,  as  distinguished  from  the  old  world  of  sec- 
tarianism, obscurantism  and  dogmatism,  The  New  World  is 
pledged. 

The  June  issue  of  The  New  World  will  contain  contribu- 
tions from  E.  B.  Andrews,  C  A.  Briggs,  Mrs.  Humphry  Ward, 
Francis  Tiffany,  S.  D.  McConnell,  Josiah  Royce,  Minot  J. 
Savage,  W.  D.  Whitney,  T.  K.  Cheyne  and  other  noted  writers. 

In  additions  to  the  writers  in  the  March  and  June  numbers, 
the  Editors  of  The  New  "'''^orld  have  reason  to  expect  early 
contributions  from  James  Martineau,  C  R.  Lanman,  James 
Bryce,  C.  P.  Tiele,  A.  V.  G.  Allen,  John  W.  Chadwick,  R. 
Heber  Newton,  E.  C.  Smyth,  ^-ancis  E.  Abbot,  J.  P.  Peters, 
E.  E.  Hale,  O.  Pfleiclerer,  Albert  Reville  and  others. 

Single  Numbers,  75  cents.     Yearly  »Subscription,  53.00. 
BOSTON  AND  NEW  YORK. 

HOUGHTON,   MIFFLIN  &  CO.,  Publishers. 


). 

50L0GY. 


f  which 
inder  to 
tiich  the 
lertinent 

editorial 
rett  and 
,t  Orello 
nan  (the 
Boston), 
id  Theo- 
tion  has 
3gy,  and 
the   new 
:rs,  with- 
ts  editors 
light  of 
y%— all  of 
enduring 
s  of  such 
d  of  sec- 
VORLD  is 

contribu- 
ry  Ward, 
Minot  J. 
writers, 
numbers, 
)ect  early 
n,  James 
Iwick,  R. 
Peters, 

J3.00. 
JHERS. 


Papers  of  the  Anjerican  Historical  Association. 

Five  volumes  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  American  Historical  Associa- 
tion, indexed  and  handsomely  bound  in  dark  blue  cloth,  with  gilt  top, 
have  been  published.  These  volumes  will  be  sent  post  paid,  at  15  each, 
to  subscribers. 

Members  of  the  Association,  on  payment  of  seventy-flve  cents  will  re- 
ceive post  paid  any  one  of  these  bound  volumes  in  exchange  for  unbound 
numbers  with  title  page  and  index,  if  returned  prepaid  in  good  condition 
for  binding. 

Volume  I.  contains  the  re|)ort  of  the  organization  and  proceedings  of  the 
Association  at  Saratoga  in  1884,  and  also  the  proceedings  for  1885,  with 
special  papers  by  Andrew  D.  White,  on  "Studies  in  General  History  and 
the  History  of  Civilization;"  by  Dr.  George  W.  Knight,  on  "The  History 
and  Management  of  Federal  Land  Grants  for  Education  in  the  Northwest 
Territory;"  "The  Louisiana  Purchase  in  its  Influence  upon  the  American 
System,"  by  Rt.  Kev.  C.  F.  Robertson,  Bishop  of  Misiimri;  and  a  "His- 
tory of  the  Appointing  Power  of  the  President,"  by  I'rofessor  Lucy  M. 
Salmon,  of  Vassar  College. 

Volume  IL  contains  the  report  of  the  proceedings  in  Washington  in 
1886,  with  special  papers  on  "The  Hipt-^-^,  of  the  Doctrine  of  Comets,"  by 
Andrew  D.  White;  "Willem  Usselin^,  Founder  of  the  intchand  Swedish 
West  India  Companies,"  by  Dr.  J.  F.  Jameson;  "Churcii  and  State  in  the 
I'nited  States,"  by  Dr.  Philip  Schaff. 

Volume  III.  contains  reports  of  the  proceedings  in  Boston  and  Cam- 
bridge in  1887,  and  in  Washington  in  1888.  Most  of  the  papers  read  at 
these  two  conventions  are  here  printed  in  full. 

Volume  IV.  contains  a  report  of  the  proceedings  at  the  Washington 
meeting  in  1889.  With  this  volume  began  the  system  of  publication  in 
quarterly  parts,  embracing  groups  of  papers  and  important  single  mono- 
graphs like  that  of  Dr.  G.  Brown  Goode,  on  "The  Origin  of  the  National 
Scientific  and  Educational  Institutions  of  the  United  States." 

Volume  V.  is  now  complete,  and  is  the  last  of  the  series  published  by 
G.  P.  Putnam's  Son's.  .Future  reports  will  be  issued  from  the  Smithsonian 
Institution. 

Since  the  incorporation  of  the  American  Historical  Association  by  Cor  . 
gress  in  1889,  tbe  society  has  been  associated  with  the  Smithsonian  Insti- 
tution and  through  Secretary  Langley  reports  annually  to  Congress.  The 
report  for  the  year  1889  contains  a  general  account  of  the  proceedings  in 
Washington  that  year,  the  inaugural  address  of  President  C.  K.  Adams,  a 
paper  on  "The  Spirit  of  Historical  Research,"  by  James  Schouler,  and  a 
reprint  of  Dr.  Goode's  paper  on  "The  Origin  of  the  National  Scientific  and 
Educational  Institutions  of  the  United  States,"  together  with  Mr.  P.  L. 
Ford's  Bibliography  of  the  published  works  of  members  of  the  American 
Historical  Association.  The  report  for  1890  contains  an  account  of  the 
proceedings  in  Washington  for  that  year,  abstracts  of  all  the  papers  read, 
John  Jay's  inaugural  address  on  "The  Demand  for  Education  in  American 
History,"  a  supplementary  bibliography  of  the  published  works  of  mem- 
bers, and  the  first  part  of  a  bibliography  of  the  publications  of  State  His- 
torical Societies  in  tliis  country.  These  reports  are  issued  free  to  members 
of  the  Association,  and  can  be  obtained  by  others  through  Members  of 
Congress,  or  on  payment  of  one  dollar  per  volume. 

Address  all  orders  and  payments  to  A.  Howard  Clark,  Curator  of  His- 
torical Collections,  U.  S.  National  Museum,  Washington,  D.  C. 


/^uggejiheimer, 


ff/'eil&_  (Jo_ 


^^RE  pleased  to  announce  to  tlu 
readers  of  this  volume  their  readi 
ness  to  serve  them  iii  any  ivay,  fivm 
the  production  of  a  Visiting  Card  tc 
a  printed  volume,  of  zuhich  this  it 
a  specimen. 


QUR  JJE 


EPARTMENTS: 


pRlNl  ING. 


L  ^  '^HOGRAPHIC. 


JOB  PRINTING. 
BOOK  PRINTING. 
CATALOGUE  PRINTING 
LABEL  PRINTING. 
RAILROAD  PRINTING. 


SHOW  CARDS. 
TOBACCO,    CAN-GOOD\ 

and  other  LABELS. 
ADVERTISING    CARD.' 
BONDS,  CHECKS,  Etc. 

JjOOK  j^INDING. 

BLANK  BOOKS.  MISCELLANEOUS  BINDING. 

QARD  J^NGRAVING. 

WEDDING.  RECEPTION.  VISITING. 


DETAIL  DEPARTAiENT:  J^JECHANICAL    DEPARTMENT. 

log  East  Baltimore  Street,  Cor,  Lombard  and  Liberty  Sl 


